July 2006 Archives

Gizem worked hard to get us tickets. I helped.

It was great. :-) They played 20-30 songs, almost all of which I recognized (!), all of which were imminently danceable, except one of the encore numbers, "Leave in Silence." I haven't been to such a mass ritual in more years than I can recall. Seriously, I was trying to remember the last large popular music concert I attended - U2, I think. Before that was Michael Jackson (a last minute sub for tickets my dad had). The first one ever? Bob Seger. There was also KISS (that was a great show), and some others, but we're talking 15-20 years ago. but hey, who's counting?!

No pix - cameras were banned. :-( The stadium, Kurecesme Arena is cool - set right on the shore of the Bosphorus, nestled up against a hill, cool breezes blew in off the water at irregular intervals but often enough. The bright wealthy folk just cruised on up in their fancy boats; some folks were brought in by ferry.

A special treat was the bonus show on the ride home with Mr. Jet-Set Comedian himself, Baris (I think it's properly spelled with a whoolamajig at the bottom of the "s" but my symbol panel doesn't include that option - sounds like "sh"). He was busy recounting his world travels and assessing the likelihood of becoming an oil baron. ;-) I'll put money on him!

A witty rejoinder from Dan Savage about the recent Supreme Court ruling against same-sex marriage in Washington state:

"In New York, the court ruled in effect that irresponsible heterosexuals often have children by accident — we gay couples, in contrast, cannot get drunk and adopt in one night — so the state can reserve marriage rights for heterosexuals in order to coerce them into taking care of their offspring. Without the promise of gift registries and rehearsal dinners, it seems, many more newborns in New York would be found in trash cans."

Same-Sex Marriage Wins by Losing

They won't let me come. I am weighing a last attempt, an in-person visit to the Iranian Embassy in Ankara. It may be futile. They say (the Iranian Foreign Ministry - which must authorize visits prior to the granting of visas) that we didn't ask early enough. I'm sure they want time to check on people's backgrounds etc, and no doubt I'm more suspect because a) I'm American, and b) I want to go now, at this potentially volatile time. I'm afraid that I won't get another chance to go, not even in my whole lifetime, not if war breaks for real. :-/

Yesterday's NYTimes is the grimmest yet, with it's account (Iran Hangs in Suspence...) of the tensions in Tehran and their view of the Isreal-Hezbullah battle as a first step in a military incursion toward Iran. Last week's Economist (July 22) described it as "The accidental war" in their "Leaders" section that will be hard to end. Wouldn't this be a good time for conscious evolution, an opportunity to put collective intelligence to work? Sociobiology might yet be too strong.

The tragedies of this escalation range from the most intimate - the death of children at Qana - to the general social structure of cultural life that North Americans continue to take for granted. When will we face the truth that our leisure is directly related to others' suffering?

I think the attacks should end - but not just from Israel. It is too easy to simply blame them by ignoring the constant - and active - threats surrounding and picking at them day-in and day-out. It is not acceptable to excuse any form of violence. Only rationalizations - intellectual and ideological twists of thinking - can justify the violence of either side. The solution must involve all sides and commit all players.

My own presentation was scheduled for 5 pm on Friday (July 21). Two panelists didn’t show. This was disappointing as their topics seemed closely aligned, however it gave Inka and myself flexibility and allowed time for a rousing discussion within the group. We had a whopping audience of three (!) to begin, then two more wandered in late, another one later, and three more latest: a grand total of nine. Not bad at all. Two of the audience members turned out to be translators for the European Communities (bonus for me!!) and a third had friends who worked within the European Institutions.

Our panel was called “EU: Europe Beyond Geography?” (2.51). Inka’s presentation, “European Public Spheres: Uniting and Dividing,” explored how political subjectivity is constructed in time and space through media systems and by pro-European journalists. I won’t summarize her entire talk but rather will select the parts that (in my mind) led into my talk, or provided me with food for thought about my topic. For instance, Inka characterized the pro-European journalists as the new elite because they are so close to power. These journalists are also a new class because they’ve been able to escape their national landscape. Now they are trying to find a niche for their country in the media geography about the EU: what is our nation doing here? Inka described this as a “new type of instrumental journalism.”

I noted this for its parallels with interpreters, who are also elite by being close to power and have improved their class standing by being dually-situated in their home country and Brussels/Strausburg. The economics of interpretation are quite the battleground, however, and I don’t know how this compares with journalists. The European institutions are insisting on hiring staff interpreters (known as officials or functionnaires) only if they relocate to Brussels. They are also driving incomes down because younger people from newly-joined East European countries are willing to accept lower wages than their West European counterparts. There are still many individuals who work as freelancers – hired only on an as needed basis or for short-term contracts – but the bureaucratizing trend is squeezing out many of the most experienced interpreters and discouraging this independent form of labor.

I have no structure to my life! Only that which I establish for myself or my body demands (y’know, food, potty). The biophysicist had last-minute business in town yesterday and I had some stress with the quick change in plan. I realized there was no need for my reaction…then I recognized this bit of emotionality began two days ago with the cab fiasco. I wasn’t able to stop it at the moment of recognition: it’s momentum accompanied me into the evening until I got into a random itunes shuffle and started to organize my stuff. I think the silly anxieties are because I’ve never been in such a liminal space. Not that I can recall, anyway. (Perhaps I should say, not one of which I was aware.)

I have extraordinarily generous housing here at Sabanci Üniversitesi, which is a pretty darn fancy facility. I keep thinking of the underground atom smasher in France (I believe I read about it in Dan Brown’s “Angels and Demons”). It's appropriate, anyway, as CERN works on superconducting magnets and my pal here works on metal ions. I’ll be able to get online with my laptop and use the gym facilities. I saw someone in the lunchroom today that I swore I recognized from the conference but couldn’t place. Tonight I came across her business card, Ayse Öncü!

(Some time ago I signed up on the site “43 things…” and have a few of the “things I’d like to do” sent to me periodically, they come addressed to ”future self” from “past self.” One is “trust more”. It’s almost weird that the more I relax the more things seem to work out . . . although not always how I envision. I’m still adjusting to the disappointment of not being able to go to Iran.)

My last massage appointment (before I left the States) is on my mind. KZ found a rather knotted up on spot in a forearm and said, it’s the Jin Shin Jyutsu spot for control. “Something might be up with that.” Hmmm….

And now I recall that my annoyance with the transportation system was not the first welling of emotion; that had occurred earlier in the day upon preparing to enter the Ayasofia.

I mentioned the paintings that were on exhibit…I’d love to put them on display, but go look at the artist’s site: Ayten Mungan Polat. She uses the technique called marbling, “trying to tell in a spiritual and abstract way with her own symbols the impressions of life on her and the life itself . . . telling creation . . . “

I found her work moving, this one is titled Love is Lonely Rider. (She gave me permission to photograph.) I’m more and more convinced that the effect (as in effectiveness) of art is contingent on the subjective state of the viewer/receiver – or maybe that’s just my narrow capacity for appreciation? I know one can learn the technical features that make a work stand out, but if it doesn’t affect you, what’s the point?

This panel was great – the closest of all I’ve attended to my own area of current investigation. Marie Gillespie introduced the panelists’ collaborative work as an outgrowth of two puzzles. One puzzle being “the limits of cosmopolitanism and the huge variations in how this term is used” (she listed multiculturalism and internationalism, among other contexts) and the second an imbalance within studies of transnationalism privileging “connectivity [as a] shared topic, interest, [and/or] emphasis,” with “less attention to disconnections, especially with language… [which is] not explored with enough depth.”

The overviews shared here grow out of work on two different research projects:

1) How different language communities interpreted news of 9/11 over the first three months. www.afterseptember11.tv It seems that people with multilingual competencies were mixing, matching, and comparing a variety of different sources of information and news with CNN, Al-Jazeera etc. Multilinguals seem to share a couple of distinct characteristics, such as a profound dissatisfaction with mainstream politics and politicians and a deep distrust of media, leading them to search – actively – for alternative sources.

2) www.mediatingsecurity.com is a collaborative ethnography between Marie and Ben, a 3-year study of transnational media discourses about security. (Which might be relevant to the polycentricity team from Dexus 3.0)

What the panelists have found are three types of cosmpolitanism, which generally “don’t talk to each other”:

1. demotic/elite cosmopolitanism (Marie)
2. normative cosmopolitanism (Ben)
3. aesthetic/literary cosmopolitanism (Tom)

What these three scholars are most interested in are the functions of these various cosmopolitanisms, particularly the ways in which they turn out to have compatibility with fascisistic discourses.

Remember that “respite” I anticipated enjoying a few days ago? Well, I received a phone call saying, “Let’s leave in three minutes!” This was not possible. I was still in pajamas! Hadn’t we already decided not to go out? “Oh take your time. The next bus is in 20 minutes. We can sleep over and you can spend tomorrow in town.”

Take my time? Twenty minutes? I’ll have you know that I made it, and Gizem’s father described me as “pleasant, mellow, and down to earth.”

(Perhaps I am undergoing a personality transformation?) :-)

I was annoyed (some 24 hours later) to miss the 6:30 bus from Kadiköy to Sabanci. I turned it into a more than decent evening though, had tea (cay) and tost at a tea garden on the shore,

"The pattern is a combination of sequences that makes it easier for the DNA to bend itself and wrap tightly around a nucleosome. But the pattern requires only some of the sequences to be present in each nucleosome binding site, so it is not obvious. The looseness of its requirements is presumably the reason it does not conflict with the genetic code, which also has a little bit of redundancy or wiggle room built into it."

Now, don't you think it would be cool if this biological wiggle room could find its way into human political (war)fares?

I was warned about going to Iran last night by a non-american. First time that has happened. Not that I'll be going anyway. :-( Just received the offical "no" from the university that tried to sponsor my visit:

"I hope you are well. Thank you for your e.mail. Please note that
unfortunately due to new regulations, visa applications from US citizens needs to be sent to the Foreign Ministry many months in advance and this was not the case with your application.

I am sorry for this matter and I hope that there will be another chance for you to visit Iran sometime in the future."

I'm bummed but have had plenty of time to adjust to this possibility. :-/

Meanwhile, there's been much energy toward the "unwanted war" in Lebanon which is devastating the national economy and hundreds of thousands of people's lives. My friend Yasser sent information a few days ago, including these statistics:

"the recent Israeli war on Lebanon and Gaza has killed more than 400 civilians, injured several thousands, and displaced more than 500,000."

Activists at the recent Crossroads conference designed and distributed a petition (which I signed) to end the violence. Here's another one: Academics against Israeli Aggression on Lebanon and Gaza. Meanwhile, here are some links for detailed information about what it's like from "their" side.

Updates on the Israeli Aggression in Lebanon, a blog reported the headline news from Lebanese television.

Electronic Lebanon, self-described as "publishes news, commentary, analysis, and reference materials about the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict from a Palestinian perspective. EI is the leading Palestinian portal for information about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and its depiction in the media."

Sanayeh Relief Center in Beirut, affiliated with Lebanon Updates (above) are humanitarians who were all working in Beirut when this latest round began.

Gizem's father (who hosted me to a spectacular dinner in a well-appointed Turkish apartment) spoke at length about the history and politics of the region, emphasizing that humanity has lived here – with and against each other – longer than anyplace else. He described the current situation with Iran as "delicate," and suggested I might want to wait. I have no choice now, of course, but I wonder if humanity will be able to collectively turn this tide around? Everyone needs to feel safe, at least safe enough from random explosions, accidental and deliberate early violent death, and such incredible mourning.

Those of you with loads more bucks than me might want to check out UrbanSurvival.com.

I slept for 12 hours. Which was a good thing because I woke up to the home of a biophysicist. I made myself a nice breakfast and cup of tea, choosing the cup that most resembled how I felt. :-) Actually, it is a relief to break the hectic pace of the past week. No regrets, but I really don’t live my life so frenetically most of the time.

Yesterday I enjoyed a leisurely breakfast with Catherine and the Dragon before they returned home, then Spark and I played tourist at the Arkeoloji Museum, and then Pera. I’ll devote a post to each of these later, replete with photos. I ate some more kokoreq – fried this time, which is The Best! – and tried the rice-stuffed clams. They were not so delicious, too much cinnamon and otherwise overcooked. Oh well. I’m sure there is variation. The waiter remembered I like Efes Dark, which was fun. We also tried Turkish ice cream, which has its own unique texture and included a show. The ice cream man made both of us look foolish but it was definitely worth the laugh. :-)

Then it was time for live music. Our first stop, the Munzur, was the best. Later we heard some young guys improvising between traditional Turkish and modern electronic sounds – not bad, actually, and the third venue was cheesy as all get out (although the squat toilet was rather luxurious compared to others I’ve encountered).

I had entertained hope to attend the free show at Babylon tonight – it’s a hot music place that’s been closed for awhile for renovations or some such. But, inertia is going to keep my behind planted. Perhaps I’ll catch another show there later, since hope for Iran is fading. I heard a story of some filmmakers who tried to get in (also under short notice) and failed. Would my luck have been better if I had applied on my own through the Pakistani Embassy in the US? Who knows, but the timing would still have been very very tight. Clearly, the claim that one’s request could be expedited by a mediator within Iran is also subject to many variations. If I had loads of capital to invest, wanna bet I’d already have been approved? sigh.

Refers to spending half-a-day (or more) to go somewhere to do only one thing. So I learned from Catherine and the Dragon, who didn’t quite imply that my slow and apparently aimless touristic wanderings were taxing to their no-nonsense, take-care-of-business Taiwanese sensibilities. :-)

We began with At Meydam in Sultanhamet and then Suleymaniye, a.k.a. the Blue Mosque (above). I didn’t enter, as the posted rules requested “no shorts”. I doubted that there was serious policing occurring but felt no problem respecting the request to respect the religious space. I wandered around the exterior, discovering the foot-washing area and getting picked up by a carpet salesman who very much wanted me to come drink some free tea. I was rescued, and we continued our search for the Basilica Cistern.

It is pretty cool. They’ve spiced it up with some colored lights to illuminate the regularly-spaced columns, bring some of the fish into visibility, and instill more mystery to the sideways and upside down Medusa heads. It is amazing to me to imagine the space as it must have been in use: full of water, rather than mostly drained, completely dark. Symbols immersed – physically present in the space and to some extent (?) active in the imaginations of those who built the structure and consumed its water.

We had a mellow lunch and marched on to discover that the museums are all closed on Mondays. The nerve! :-)

We walked some of the grounds around Topkapi Palace before deciding some down time was a nice idea. We were So Right! We met up with Spark for the evening and he tour-guided us at rapid-pace along a river cruise, through a delicious dinner - and fireworks! - (despite the need to negotiate the bill down to the price we’d understood originally), and several Plans for evening entertainment. Plan A was dispensed with because of time (we were too late). Plan B was the river cruise so that was done, Plan B1 started to sound complicated, Plan C required quick action and finally, Plan D won. We dispersed to our respective rest.

The City of Ember by Jeanne DuPrau

On fear:

“Somewhere inside her, a black worm of dread stirred…could things really be as bad as he said? She didn’t want to believe it. She pushed the thought away” (2003: 18).

On belief:

“Sometimes you can find useful things just by choosing randomly….just reach out and grab something – in the hope that by accident you might come upon the very information you need. It might be something that another person had written down … just a sentence or two that would be like a flash of light…fitting together things you already know to make a solution to everything” (edited: verbs changed to present tense; “he” to “you”; 120).

On major life transitions when someone takes care of you:

“The day had a comforting feel to it, like a rest between the end of one time and the beginning of another” (141).

On desire:

“She suddenly wanted those things so badly she felt weak” (152).
“She remembered the hunger she’d felt . . . It wasn’t a pleasant feeling. She didn’t want to want things that way” (153).

On earth:

“Light,” she said.
“I see it,” said Doon. “It’s getting brighter.”
The edge of the sky turned gray, and then pale orange, and then deep fiery crimson. The land stood out against it, a long black rolling line. One spot along this line grew so bright they could hardly look at it, so bright it seemed to take a bite out of the land. It rose higher and higher until they could see that it was a fiery circle, first deep orange and then yellow, and too bright to look at any longer. The color seeped out of the sky and washed over the land. Light sparkled on the soft hair of the hills and shone through the lacy leaves as every shade of green sprang to life around them. (255-256)

On life:

“Take a lamp, for instance. When you plug it in, it comes alive, in a way. That’s because it’s connected to a wire that’s connected to the generator, which is making electricity…But a bean seed isn’t connected to anything. Neither are people. We don’t have plugs and wires that connect us to generators. What makes living things go is inside them somehow” (68).

Next: The People of Sparks

(Please forgive the generalizing “we” – I comment upon observable discursive patterns.)

Despite knowing that meaning is fluid, local, and transitory we still want to fix it. What is cosmopolitanism? Does “it” come from cosmopolitanness, or is it a kind, say, of cosmo-politeness (offered by Tom yesterday)? Such a longing for normal science!

What is “European identity”? What does it mean to be “European” or “cosmopolitan”? The phallic order ”just is”. Bullshit!

The Poet had it right, I think, when she spoke so eloquently of the younger generation whose subjectivities are already constituted on less nationalistic characteristics. “I would rather my daughter grow up considering herself European from Greece, with heritage from Anatolia."

Perhaps this is the point Ferhat worked toward in his presentation? That the nation-as-center is being shifted in/through the ways that citizens and noncitizens utilize dominant (nation-based) discourses in the service of their own quests for subjective grounding?

“You have to subvert the grammar,” Bülent told Veysel, regarding an example Veysel shared of someone (?) saying, “I is (such-and-so)” instead of Bülent’s “I am a negro,” citing the phrase he uttered in German.

Was it Andreas who said I needed to be familiar with linguistics to study interpretation at the European Parliament? I resist, I resist! But it gives me the clue to the temporalizing element in Bülent’s speech (perhaps he is less so in his writing). Bülent acknowledges that the time of the penis is past – I am not convinced the substitution of “phallus” is anything more than semantics – yet he speaks as if it is still the only possible frame of reference.

It is one thing to discipline oneself to the limits of a theorist (Mervi and Johanna did this with Durkheim) or an epistemology (Chatterjee and Ang’s assertion that cultural studies scholars need to stick to established authorizing boundaries), and another to represent an epistemology as an ideology by presenting it discursively as a framework everyone else must exist within just because it makes sense to you.

In other words, Bülent wants to impose his “outside” on my “inside.” Isn’t this the classic patriarchal move? You say: “The structure (sensations/perception) of my dick supercede the structure (sensations/perception) of your womb.”

No.

Not only did I bump into Derek after blogging about him (he was engaged in the business of stealing pistachios) but I also met Elaine and we had a great talk about the blurring of boundaries between fiction and non-fiction, various uses of performance, and the ambiguities we experience (if I’m not overattributing?) regarding displays of emotion and affectivity. Ien Ang and Greg Noble were both at (3.38) Multilingual Cosmopoliticians this evening, which gave me a chance to greet them. I also introduced myself to Tom Cheesman, who gave me such a boost of cyber-encouragement when I first started thinking about interpretation in Europe.

Erkan found me tonight, as did Ezgi, Alisa, and others. (Nothing like a bit of notoriety, eh?!) Meanwhile, Gin and Tonic Man keeps yelling "Butch Power!"

I faded a bit at The Deep (my introvert side?); hopefully the extrovert will reappear for dancing in a bit. Or did I use up all that energy last night?

I attended (3.01) Abstract Social Identities and Chaotic Everyday Practices on a recommendation from the Gin and Tonic Man. It was great. Bülent Somay was the last presenter and he cracked open the semiotic space, inspiring a passionate debate. I think it was Alisa Lebow who challenged him, wondering if he'd made "the same mistake as Lacan [by] giving priority to the penis because of its proximity to the father." I give him credit, even though he didn't seem to grasp the question about or quality of essentialization in the ways he referenced and thereby reified the outdated sexist conceptualization.

I'll probably get myself into trouble here (ahem), as much of the specific information today was new to me. I'll paraphrase to the best of my ability and hope someone will correct any errors or misconceptions.

Guilt is a great thing. I was hanging out on the floor trying to find both an electrical outlet and wireless internet connection when Prof. Dr. Lale Duruiz rescued me - offering me the use of her very own office! She said I had "a great tactic." :-)

I attended only one panel (besides mine) - 2.3 Emotion Trouble, or the Affective Turn in Media and Cultural Studies II. It was quite interesting. Elaine Chang read an engaging paper on dating game shows, posing the question of comparison between winning a mate and winning a refrigerator. Her conclusion had to do with an economy of love and surplus desire, along with many questions about these public displays of emotionality and the subjective desire for it. It certainly had me reflecting a bit on this whole weblog business. :-) What I "put on display," what I don't, who I bring into this space with me, who I don't. How I bring people into this space. This is a more refined question than has been posed in the past. I've answered the question, "why blog," on more than one occasion, but it always feels too abstract and depersonalized. I actually believe in this forum as a space of interaction, which means it could become a space for interaction. Ah - this is a recurring debate too! (Those dang discourses. They just keep cycling around.)

I had a couple of "aha" moments during this panel, particularly about the field of cultural studies and what/why/how it differs from social interaction. Helps me get more perspective on the cultural studies-ists (?) in my department as well as giving me some hooks where I might be able to attach carabiners from/to my work on language, interpretation, interaction -> and the "flow" from these "up" to institutional policies, practices, structures, etc.

Mervi Pantti & Johanna Sumiala-Seppäälä's paper on mediatized death rituals reminded me of the historical public lynchings in the US. One of the slides described news reportage of tragic accidents in Finland "as moments of collective effervescence." I can't recall who/where I read or heard something similar about the picnics white folks organized periodically with a lynching as the main "entertainment." I also thought of the television coverage of 9/11, and of course all of the on-going war coverage. I keep puzzling, how is all of this vast human energy going to be rechanneled? What else can these impulses and desires be turned toward?

Anu Koivunen then spoke about emotions as politics and the "curious impasse" between various schools/approaches, the recent surge of interest in affect/affectivity, and the general absence of self-reflection of scholars engaged in these topics. I have eto say, I thought it was terribly ironic that Anu noted this individual, scholarly absence and then explained she wouldn't go into it herself. Her paper was fascinating without that element and I'm not sure what/how she could have shared that aspect without it being a completely different paper and prone to all of the kinds of criticisms that (for instance) I have received from ways of doing this blog. It is a trick, to bring the personal in without making one's self the (egocentric, narcissistic) subject. Can I (or anyone) be an object of study without being/becoming/remaining a subject, too? But then, isn't that the point - to be both subject and object, as we are already treated by/within the system(s) in which we live?

A last note before I dash off to the first of today's panels. Karin Becker was in the audience of this panel and she shared her experience of the day before. She was called by a Swedish television program for an interview. They wanted to ask her whether their own media coverage of the Swedes currently stuck in Beirut is actually "creating angry emotions." Wow! That's a cool level of reflexivity on the part of the programmers . . . and . . . it is a case-in-point of the POWER of the media to shape viewer's responses. If they are able to identify the subtle features of their own broadcast that invokes anger, might this not enable the deliberate elicitation of anger in a population should someone feel the need to inspire it? Likewise, suppose you don't want people to become angry, might there not be ways to re-frame the coverage so that anger is muted, dispelled, redirected? Of course, these are precisely the arguments made in the other two presentations, both of which show various ways these manipulations are accomplished in regard to two existential motifs: death, and love. Love and death? (Does sequence matter?)

;-)

I approached a couple of likely young men. Likely for what? Who knew?!!! “Are you friendly?” I inquired, wondering if they would bite. Burak replied that he was exhausted. “I can’t speak in English or Turkish.”

It’s a good thing I wrote my reflections of Day 1 during the last panel, before the conference “get together.” Veysel (of the gin and tonics) told me about Foucault and disciplinary discourses: “Discipline starts in deficits not real imitation.” (We were speaking about the debate initiated by Göle with Chatterjee.) Kutlughan (the mainstream guy) condemned postmodernists in general. Altug told us of eating Turkish crayfish in Sweden (they’re not eaten in Turkey, only caught here and shipped there as a "delicacy" ~ talk about "postmodern!") Yonca promised to email. Yasemin identified tursu as pickled plum. That was a treat, although not as delicious as the deniz berulcesi devoured at the after-party. (As well as for breakfast this morning!)

Serkan didn’t stick around but I did get the briefest synopsis of his presentation (1.43) which sounded awesome. Baris (“peace”) also vanished even though he had complained of being left out when it took a moment for introductions to be made. I’m not sure where Veysal ended up. He’d had his eye on someone and was in hot pursuit when we left. He gave me one of the best compliments on my hair that I’ve ever received: “It’s just noise!” :-)

The reception ended: “Tomorrow this will be a school,” the security guard informed us as he chased us away. But we weren’t done. Camiye me geldik! We ended up somewhere deep in the Nevizade.

Burak dubbed me “mommy” – which turned out not to be so special as he had at least two others of various genders and a “father” as well. Who are the rest of these people? Dilek, Kaan, Mark, Omer, and Ayse, among unnamed others. :-) There was even a Koray lookalike - giving a hint of things to come. Turns out I like the lion’s milk, and all the spreads that came with it (eggplant, yogurt, a bean paste, olives). I want to know what fish arrived later? It was fantastic.

The question that lingers is, did any of us become prettier? Igelim guzelleselim!

Am I experiencing Turkey as a benchmark to distinguish myself as part of the “West”? Derek Bryce, the first presenter of the panel (1.55) European Identity in a Transnational World, made me wonder. Istanbul, situated on a major river, reminds me of Budapest: palaces on the river, pedestrian lifestyle, centrality of the river in social life, busses not a subway, architecture, language (not that Hungarian and Turkish are similar, but that both are so far from my linguistic frames of reference). The dress is mostly western. Commercial. Many apparently unemployed people. The taksi’s are a hoot – last night I imagined myself in a herd of sheep being shunted at a dead run through a narrow gate. One feels as if it’s a game of bumper cars without the contact. Such skill!

I was going to give her a hard time for only budgeting a half-hour with me – after I came all the way from the US! – but then I was the one at the wrong Starbucks. :-/ Besides, she gave me an hour. :-) And, I've read her excellent book: De-/Re-Contextualizing Conference Interpreting: Interpreters in the Ivory Tower?.

I should have been diligent about notes the entire conversation because she mentioned at least a half-dozen names of folks I ought to follow up on. Some were familier: Pochhacker, Toury, Seleskovitch. Others I recognized after she wrote them down: Vuorikoski (I have one article by her, I think), and Morven Beaton (I remember at least an hour with the librarian trying to track down her work). I’m not sure about Kaisa Koskinen . . . perhaps.

I pitched Blommaert to her, especially his work on voice, which he argues is the proper object of critique in critical discourse analysis: “Voice stands for the way in which people manage to make themselves understood or fail to do so. In doing so, they draw upon and deploy discursive means which they have at their disposal, and they have to use them in contexts that are specified as to conditions of use. Consequently, if these conditions are not met, people ‘don’t make sense’ – they fail to make themselves understood – and the actual reasons for this are manifold” (Blommaert 2005: 4-5).

We had quite the animated conversation (helped along, no doubt, by caffeine and chocolate).

Here’s as good a place as any to post these notes on language, interpreting, and meaning (since that is the gist of what we discussed):

From , fiction by Barry Unsworth:

There were even fireworks. Seriously! At the end of the evening, as we rode back in a taksi, the sky lit up. (Alright, it was actually a “special” football (soccer) match but the timing seemed beyond coincidental.)

Gizem didn’t waste a minute getting me out into the city – well, not once she finally found me. :-) (Taksim is a large area with several places for busses to stop.) After settling me in to the Riva Hotel, we started walking. Right away we got a snack, I had simit (yum). Then we started walking in earnest. And walking. And walking. I held up for about an hour, until jet lag attacked. Nothing like Turkish Coffee to Perk me Right Back up! Gizem’s a good tour guide, btw (thanks for hooking us up, Zeynep!) We admired several views from the Bosphorus, identified many museums and other sites of historical interest, compared notes from the “vast” (!) knowledge I acquired from a book of fiction devoured on the plane, and Gizem’s knowledge of the real scene. The weather was perfectly temperate for a casual stroll from Taksim to the Ostokoy.

I now have a list of six or more “must have” meals, as well as several places I “have to see.” ;-) Last night’s dinner was light: pacanga boregi, (semi-dried beef rubbed in delicious spices then fried in filo dough), and sunflower seed wheat bread smeared variously with ezme (ecili) – a spicy tomoto, onion and garlic spread, hayolan (yogurt with spices), and soslu pattican (eggplant in a special tomato sauce).

As my itinerary for today was planned (!), I asked about getting a map of the bus routes. Gizem just laughed. Oh well! :-) She had already warned me several times about the traffic and a certain disregard for traffic signals and (therefore) pedestrians. “This isn’t Amherst!” Later, however, she told me I’d do fine negotiating my way among the vehicles: “You’re worse than a Turk!” (I am not sure this was intended as a compliment…?)!

Gizem’s a biophysicist. Her work on metal ions is pretty cool. I tried to conjure a direct link to consciousness but the connections weren’t happening (not for me, not tonight). I did learn that the physics part is in the technology; her focus is more on the biology end of things. My biology directed me to SLEEP.

Byron

This inscription begins a novel, The Rage of the Vulture, set at the turn of the 20th century in Constantinople, during the last days of the Ottoman Empire. Armenians were still nationless, then. I wonder if the “Constitution” touted during this time was much of a precursor to the secularization of Turkey under Ataturk?

It was a good read for the long plane ride. The protagonist, Captain Markham, is consumed by the need to compensate for a moral lapse (“the love of the turtle”?). His self-absorption is such that he makes choices and engages in behavior that have excruciating effects on those closest to him (making him rather unsympathetic) yet his perseverance and single-mindedness are evocative: he is a quintessential “individual” but aware of his “bound-up-ness” (for lack of a sophisticated social science term) with other people and events whose unfolding is completely out of his control. Late in the novel he finally meets the right person to whom to make his confession – someone who has known pain:

“Markham knew now what it was he had seen in the other man’s face, something there that had survived the indulgence and corruption of life. He had set it down vaguely as refinement, but he saw now that it was the knowledge of pain. Knowledge, not sympathy”(1982: 387).

After listening to Markham’s detailed account of self-preservation, the man replies:

“’But twelve years ago – that was another lifetime, my dear.’ He tucked in his chin and looked solemnly at Markham. ‘We must learn to turn over the page,’ he said. ‘We must have resilience. That is a quality I value very highly. I have it myself. There have been many things not much to my credit, you understand. Fairly numerous’” (1982:389).

The book ends with the son’s reflections on the notion of home: “It was the territory one hoped to recover again, oneself miraculously perfect still, unwounded, unmutilated, whole.”

It will be hell. (But if you have a good post-party (or two) - as I did, grin - then it's worth it.) (What I learned last night? Maintain ironic distance.) ;-)

They probably won't try to make so, but something will get screwed up, outside of anyone's control (unless you've really annoyed someone; then they might (?) take advantage of this already high-stress opportunity to see if they can stimulate an implosion).

First, three days before I was to begin, was the email stating that two of my (already scheduled!) dates were now "unavailable." Ha.

(It was resolved - some 36 hours later.)

Then, at the end of Day 3, I was told Questions 5 and 4 were being switched. (It obviously didn't matter to them that I had carefully arranged a day OFF in-between Questions 4 & 5 in order to study for Question 5. Ha Ha.

This just happened to be on the same day I found that I'd dumped an entire bottle of OPEN shampoo into a duffle bag. If you ever check out a particularly soapy book from the library... that would be me.

Here's a link I found just prior to the Last Question which is a perfect example of something it would have been nice to have known about roughly a year ago: Discourse Theory. Ha Ha Ha!

I confess, I had a very particular child in mind last night while colleagues spoke of giving kids the stink eye, detailing various and myriad reasons why none should ever be allowed out in public, and declaiming against pregnancy in the first place. I admit, it was too close to home for me to join in the banter, but I appreciated it nonetheless. (Although apparently not as much as our waiter, who overheard one of the birthday girls suggesting that it was just such talk that prevented me from hanging out with them more often: “You should hear what it sounds like from here.”)

I laughed hard throughout the evening. :-) It was good to see and be with the assorted “criminals” and “suspects” from the Communication Department, even if my energy was too low to contribute much beyond (my usual?!) rather staid facts and observations.

“Why would you travel to such a hostile region?” Art asked, and others joined in with some comments about my common sense. I did, in fact, actually draw up and sign a will (how’s that for placing someone’s age?) and the Legal Secretary (whom I’ve known for several years) did tease about wondering whether or not I was “really in my right mind” or not. :-)

“It’s not hostile inside Iran,” I replied, to which there was a general murmur of acknowledgment. “Just the surrounding region,” Art clarified.

When I got in last night, Neil said, “It’s not looking good.” Huh? He’s been watching Fox. The Bush administration is blaming Iran for the violence among Israel-Gaza-Lebanon-Hezbollah. Damn. When I woke up this morning I realized that the Foreign Ministry in Iran probably considers my “late” application so suspicious because it’s probably precisely a time when the US might try to slip agitators and spies into the country. I remember talking with Arturo, who said if he was the paranoid type, my general openness about things would make him more suspicious of me, rather than less. Sigh.

I will be disappointed if I can’t go. I became quite excited about the adventure (experience, opportunity) as a reward for completing comps and myriad other similarly important life tasks in the past two months. I’ll be more disappointed, however, if the US continues down the path of war. What about the road less traveled? As I listened to the teasing among the partygoers last night I marveled at the practiced ease of ironic distance. Perhaps it is simply my own bias and projection, but I don’t believe people enter the field of communication without some desire to make things better. It’s the balance between being so keenly aware of life’s absurdity: seemingly trapped (?) within the (dialectical) power of history and yet soaking up every possible pleasure, creating our own bubbles of joy founded in/upon ‘another way.’

This morning I woke up from indeterminate dreams yet a solid idea about the power of the moment challenging the crisis of history. It occurs to me that my colleagues figured this out a long time ago. I am still playing catch-up.

"You do look relaxed and peaceful," Lorna told me while cutting my hair today. She refrained from mentioning what a change this is from usual! :-)

Kathy asked me if I was "relieved" when I gave her the last question yesterday. No, not yet - I was already on to all the other things needing to be done prior to departure... too wound up? I'd also lost steam in the final half-hour and really struggled to come up with some semblance of a conclusion.

It helped the most that Tejal feasted me, Smita beat me at bombardment, and we all shared lots of laughs and silliness. Puru snapped some photos. Fugu honored me - on only our second meeting! - with her nickname. (I'm sure she realized there was minimal chance I would learn to say her proper name correctly. Neil and Satya arrived in time for food. Estelle carried herself with aplomb. I could not have had a better evening to celebrate being done. :-)

The rest of today was also sweet! The universe smiles on me. Yippee!

“Instead of trying to erase the traces of power and exclusion, democratic politics requires us to bring them to the fore, to make them visible so that they can enter the terrain of contestation” (Mouffe 2000: 33-34).

Ziarek has "suggested that such a [redefined political] discourse, based on the dissemination and mediation of differences, should be articulated in the gap between the ethos of becoming and the ethos of alterity, between the futureal temporality of political praxis and the anarchic diachrony of obligation" (Ziarek, 2001: 83).

“…in the case of liberal-democratic politics this frontier [of a ‘them’] is an internal one, and the ‘them’ is not a permanent outsider . . . without a plurality of competing forces which attempt to define the common good, and aim at fixing the identity of the community [even though such can never be accomplished as a final achievement], the political articulation of the demos could not take place” (Mouffe 2000: 56 ).

"Community interpreting," said one interpreter educator, "is a condensed form of all the communication problems that can happen between people. It can teach you a lot about what it means to be a human being."

Amitav Ghosh on interpreting (excerpts from The Hungry Tide).

so by Boston standards it was a good party. !!

I did manage to squeeze in a bit more socializing last night (pure comps-escapism). Cris and Marcelo's new place is sweeeeet and the gathered friends way cool. The neighbors leave something to be desired though, calling in a complaint to the fire marshall on the very modest campfire the guys labored over for an hour (with all the wet wood) to get going.

The officer said something about "a cooking fire" being ok so I asked, "If we roasted marshmallows then it would be ok?" I'm not sure, but I think he thought I was being a smart-aleck, so I hastened to add, "I just want to understand the parameters!"

He was friendly enough then, even apologized for having to bust up this element of the house-warming party. Amherst town has an ordinance against any kind of fires except the cooking kind - which means grill and the whole nine yards of an entire meal. "I'd have to consider marshmallows just an excuse," he explained. Oh well.

I did have a few great conversations with a couple of really cool folk from the Translation Department, English Department, and Marcelo's work. Had a bit of trouble with some of the Spanish names pronounced with a mouth full of food (Ramon is not exactly the most difficult, but I couldn't "hear" it the first two times around!) . . . I hope this wasn't too much of a precursor to the social embarrassment I'm no doubt going to be feeling soon enough in Turkey and (fingers still crossed!) Iran.

“…there is a lot that language does to people” (Blommaert 2005: 13).

“An analysis of voice is an analysis of power effects – (not) being understood in terms of the set of sociocultural rules and norms specified – as well as of conditions for power – what it takes to make oneself understood” (Blommaert 2005: 5).

“Any concrete utterance is a link in the chain ….Utterances are not indifferent to one another, and are not self-sufficient; they are aware of and mutually reflect one another. These mutual reflections determine their character. Each utterance is filled with echoes and reverberations of other utterances to which it is related by the communality of the sphere of speech communication. Every utterance must be regarded primarily as a response to preceding utterances of the given sphere…” (Bakhtin 1986: 91).

(emphases added)

“Those social scientists most successful in establishing such interdisciplinary partnerships view themselves initially as participant observers, showing respect for the work of practitioners and technical specialists, and seeking to learn from them . . . As the social scientist gains an understanding of the organizational culture and work systems, he or she will find ways of contributing that are appreciated by the technical specialists. This will pave the way for establishing the full partnerships presented by PAR” (Whyte 1991: 240).

There was some passion at Delano's today, but not much. I had some sympathy for Zidane but it went out the window when he headbutted the Italian player. I don't care what the provocation. I was happy Italy won. Mostly, though, I was glad to see Sai (great burrito, man), Satya (in full regalia), Neil (more-or-less) . . . and Chris and Jung Yup and Srini and Alex and Dhaka . . . and others less familiar but still friendly.

It was probably my last social respite until comps are done.

A few quickies though: Friday, July 7th, Writer's Almanac included the poem, Female Comic Book Superheroes. Fun to listen to.

and tonight, less fun...a broadcast about Iran. I heard it on WMUA but can't track the details. Darn. Is it possible it was Seymour Hersh? Here's an old article he wrote about Iran, just after Bush's apparent reelection. (There was evidence of voting fraud - particularly in Ohio - but it was severely underreported.) Here's a more recent Hersh story: Would President Bush go to war to stop Tehran from getting the bomb? (It might be one I blogged before, seems familiar.)

Whoever I heard today felt that whatever messianic ambitions Bush has, he'll wait until after the November elections.

Evil Kachina sends this along with the suggestion: "Some of these probably apply."

These are the unavoidable laws of the natural universe...

1. Law of Mechanical Repair: After your hands become coated with grease your nose will begin to itch or you'll have to pee.

2. Law of the Workshop: Any tool, when dropped, will roll to the least
accessible corner.

3. Law of probability: The probability of being watched is directly
proportional to the stupidity of your act.

4. Law of the Telephone: When you dial a wrong number, you never get a
busy signal.

5. Law of the Alibi: If you tell the boss you were late for work because you had a flat tire, the very next morning you will have a flat tire.

6. Variation Law: If you change lines (or traffic lanes), the one you
were in will start to move faster than the one you are in now. (works every time).

7. Bath Theorem: When the body is fully immersed in water, the telephone rings.

8. Law of Close Encounters: The probability of meeting someone you know increases when you are with someone you don't want to be seen with.

9. Law of the Result: When you try to prove to someone that a machine
won't work, it will.

10. Law of Biomechanics: The severity of the itch is inversely proportional to the reach.

11. Theater Rule: At any event, the people whose seats are furthest from the aisle arrive last.

12. Law of Coffee: As soon as you sit down to a cup of hot coffee, your boss will ask you to do something which will last until the coffee is cold.

13. Murphy's Law of Lockers: If there are only two people in a locker room, they will have adjacent lockers.

14. Law of Dirty Rugs/Carpets: The chances of an open-faced jelly sandwich landing face down on a floor covering are directly correlated to the newness, color and cost of the carpet/rug.

15. Law of Location: No matter where you go, there you are.

16. Law of Logical Argument: Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about.

17. Brown's Law: If the shoe fits, it's ugly.

18. Oliver's Law: A closed mouth gathers no feet.

19. Wilson's Law: As soon as you find a product that you really like,
they will stop making it.

With a [heteroglossic] conception of organization studies, "one can strive for reflexivity, by which we [Clegg and Hardy, 1996] allude to ways of seeing which act back on and reflect existing ways of seeing" (4).

I throw myself to the lions' "chasm of teeth."

(In Nietzche, What is the meaning of ascetic ideals?, translated from the original Greek, p. 116.)

"By reason of this attainment of self-consciousness on the part of the will for truth, morality from henceforward - there is no doubt about it - goes to pieces: this is that great hundred-act play that is reserved for the next two centuries of Europe, the most terrible, the most mysterious, and perhaps also the most hopeful of all plays" (117).

Be humble.

Take control of the question:

Establish clear parameters for what you will include/exclude, acknowledge possible parts of the answer then rephrase to establish boundaries for the answer.

Pay homage:

Acknowledge big names, theories, etc so you can’t be accused of having overlooked something, someone important. Explain why/how these theorist’s work is – while still important – less relevant to the direction you wish to take.

Outline the course of the paper (in advance is recommended).

Rest well the day before.

I woke up early and wandered outside. I immediately encountered a fat ol' bumblebee bumbling around a flower. :-) (Is that me, getting ready for comps?!)

I finished reading Gr....'s introduction to Althusser. Ate by the gurgling water garden. (Oh how I want to make one!) Three fat frogs refused to move, hunting their own breakfasts.

Rode my bike. Finished the blog about Sam. It needed time to gestate. I remember us on the boat Sunday, leaning into the headwind, straining to catch our last deep breaths of Sam, here, in this world with us. As if seeking to suck in his spirit to carry us along the tradewinds of our own futures. From now on, our memories of him will be private, although no doubt friends, family, and loved ones of all stripes will still gather in his name.

I said farewell to the Townhouse bachelor-pad today. These guys were great to and for me. They included me almost as if I'd always been there, allowed me my own room, tolerated my bike in the middle of the living room, fed me, introduced me to their friends...and gave me lots of space/time to study.

I gotta say something about Neil with the Mind of Steel. I think I know why Mei Mei huddled under the comforter every time he was in the house. You can't get nothing past this guy!

A week or so ago, he noticed I had not included his name in a certain description of a conversation he and I had, and wanted me to know it was ok for me to name him. He thought perhaps I hadn’t included his name because I was worried he might be upset. Not to worry, he assured me.

My immediate response was …uh… a little squirmy. I said I wanted to make the conversation appear broader than it really was? But I knew that wasn’t quite right – there was a deeper source. Ah, I was worried. I didn’t know how to identify him without including more details, and I didn’t want to appear to be bragging about having convinced him of something. I guess perhaps there was a worry (?) that he might feel bad about having been convinced? Worse, convinced by Me.

I made a bunch of tactical errors regarding confidentiality and respect etc. in the early days of the blog (which constitutes the first couple of years' worth). I think my criteria and representations have improved considerably but I know it’s not perfect. Occasionally I get hints and whiffs of someone’s displeasure or annoyance, and I am still usually puzzled as to why but continue to expand my own perception of the range of reasons. At any rate, it is a distinct pleasure to engage with someone so sensitive to nuance and so proactive in following up on it. Might even miss that guy. :-/

At any rate, I told Neil that giving me such blanket permission was rather daring, "You're in trouble now!" He laughed, "There are things about myself that I don't know." Yes, me too, I thought. What better way to find out?

The quote up top was shared by Basha, who hosted the most fantastic meal and night of live music I've ever attended. (Not ever having been much of a music-head.) I was invited along spontaneously, knowing no one but my roommates. That night was a taste of living I haven't felt in a long time. Been having lots of those experiences lately.

It's good. :-)

Sam was also known as “Mr. Experiment” for his amazing career at The Experiment in International Living. You know you’ve accomplished something when more than 50 people come on a 4th of July weekend five and a half months after you died in order to celebrate your life.

I arrived at 1 pm sharp to the River Garden in downtown Brattleboro. There were already 20-30 people there and live music wafted through a slight breeze off the Connecticut River. Pat greeted me, “Did you bring the CDs?” Oops, left them in the car. Other greetings, nods of acknowledgment…I wanted to scoot out to get the music (to be played during the musician’s breaks) but conversations unfolded around me, drawing me in. Lee was explaining the choice of entertainment to someone: “It’s Sam’s Brazilian connection; he has a Brazilian family too.” I escaped but nature called, so I ducked into the toilet. As I sat there (!), the live Brazilian music permeated my awareness. I had a sudden flash of Sam as a young man, dancing in a fancy classical manner. I watched him linger through a few slow turns and the vision faded.

Mingling with the crowd after returning with Marvin Gaye and Josh Groban, the murmur of people talking, laughing, eating and drinking conveyed the pleasure people experienced. “Sam always brought people together, continually introducing us one to another.” People drifted from conversation to conversation…an easy flow of interaction. People were already telling stories, reminiscing, inquiring about when and how Sam had come into each other’s lives, as well as striking up new relationships and engaging anew on familiar themes. Lee called for everyone’s attention an hour or so into the event. “Sam planned this party, and provided for it. We’ve all heard of each other, so it feels like we’ve already met even if we haven’t.”

Tom immediately got in on the action: “Don’t believe everything you hear!”