A question of tomorrow: Blanchot, surrealism and the time of the fragment

This article offers a close critical reading of Blanchot's essay on Surrealism, 'Tomorrow at Stake', raising a series of questions concerning the time of 'Surrealist experience' and its relation to those temporal structures inscribed within the concepts of modernity, the avant-garde, and (art) history itself. It is argued, through a posited connection to Romantic conceptions of the fragment, that those 'reflexes of the future' which for Surrealism determine the value of the present, may be understood, philosophically, in relation to diverse conceptions of the 'openness' of the question, in turn suggesting a more complex understanding of Surrealism's 'avant-garde' character.

Hierarchical structures: conducive or barrier to knowledge management?

This study examines managers‟ perceptions of Knowledge Management (KM) prior to implementation of KM-systems in a global insurance company and investigates whether Hierarchical structures are conducive to KM. Mixed methods are used, combining large scale surveying and case study using content analysis to organize the data into themes that provide the basis for arguments. Evidence suggests that managers strongly align their perception of KM with communication. Despite a multi-layered, hierarchical structure and strong middle management presence, organizational structure was not viewed as an issue. These factors are usually barriers to communication and organizational flexibility, yet managers believe that they may not inhibit KM becoming fully embedded. This evidence is contradicted by the results of a global KM study where silos, stovepipe and hierarchical structures were commonly cited as barriers. This contributes to the understanding of managerial mis-conceptions of knowledge as opposed to communication, and how organizations effectively share knowledge.

Networked learning ten years on: the rise of the virtual graduate school

The aim of this paper is to reflect on how conceptions of networked learning have changed, particularly in relation to educational practices and uses of technology, that can nurture new ideas of networked learning to sustain multiple and diverse communities of practice in institutional settings. Our work is framed using two theoretical frameworks: Giddens's (1984) structuration theory and Callon & Latour's (1981) Actor Network Theory as critiqued by Fox (2005) in relation to networked learning. We use these frameworks to analyse and critique ideas of networked learning embodied in both cases. We investigate three questions: (a) the role of individual agency in the development of networked learning; (b) the impact of technological developments on approaches to supporting students within institutional infrastructures; and (c) designing networked learning to incorporate Web 2.0 practices that sustain multiple communities and foster engagement with knowledge in new ways. We use an interpretivist approach by drawing on experiential knowledge of the Masters programme in Networked Collaborative Learning and the decision making process of designing the virtual graduate schools. At this early stage, we have limited empirical data related to the student experience of networked learning in current and earlier projects. Our findings indicate that the use of two different theoretical frameworks provided an essential tool in illuminating, situating and informing the process of designing networked learning that involves supporting multiple and diverse communities of practice in institutional settings. These theoretical frameworks have also helped us to analyze our existing projects as case studies and to problematize and begin to understand the challenges we face in facilitating the participation of research students in networked learning communities of practice and the barriers to that participation. We have also found that this process of theorizing has given us a way of reconceptualizing communities of practice within research settings that have the potential to lead to new ideas of networked learning.

Can the state empower communities through localism? An evaluation of recent approaches to neighbourhood governance in England

‘Empowerment’ is a term much used by policy-makers with an interest in improving service delivery and promoting different forms of neighbourhood governance. But the term is ambiguous and has no generally accepted definition. Indeed, there is a growing paradox between the rhetoric of community empowerment and an apparent shift towards increased centralisation of power away from the neighbourhood in developed economies. This article explores the literature relating to empowerment and identifies two broad conceptions which reflect different emphases on neo-liberalism. It goes on to discuss two models illustrating different levels of state intervention at the neighbourhood level and sets out evidence from two neighbourhood councils in Milton Keynes in central England. In conclusion, it is argued that those initiatives which are top-down, state-led policy initiatives tend to result in the least empowerment (as defined by government), whereas the bottom-up, self-help projects, which may be partly state-enabled, at least provide an opportunity to create the spaces where there is some potential for varying degrees of transformation. Further empirical research is needed to test how far localist responses can challenge constraints on empowerment imposed by neo-liberalism.

Transgender Freedom and the Law: A Liberal-Poststructural Discussion on McNally

In R v McNally, gender deception is found capable of leading to the vitiation of consent to sexual intercourse and, in so doing, places restriction on the freedom of transgendered individuals in favour of cisgendered freedom. This paper seeks to challenge the standing of this decision by adopting a combined methodological approach between Deleuzian post-structuralism and Gewirthian legal idealism. In so doing, we attempt to show that the combination offers a novel and productive approach to contentious decisions, such as that in McNally. Our approach brings together post-structuralist corporeality which conceives of the body as material and productive, and Gewirth’s ‘agent’ to conceptualise the legal body as an entity which can, and should, shape judicial reasoning. It does this by employing the criterion of categorically necessary freedom on institutionalised practical reasoning. These ‘bodies of agents’ can be conceived as the underpinning and justificatory basis for the authority of the law subject to the morally rational Principle of Generic Consistency. This egalitarian condition precedent requires individualisation and the ability to accept self-differentiation in order to return to a status, which can be validly described as “law”. Ultimately, we argue that this theoretical combination responds to a call to problematise the connection made between gender discourse and judicial reasoning, whilst offering the opportunity to further our conceptions of law and broaden the theoretical armoury with which to challenge judicial reasoning in McNally. That is, a ‘good faith’ attempt to further and guarantee transgender freedoms.