Impure Memory, Imperfect Justice: A Comparison of Post-Repression Fiction Across the South Atlantic

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of Washington, 2016-06

'Slippage' is not a dirty word: Considering the usefulness of Giddens' notion of knowledgeability in understanding the possibilities for teacher education

The attempt to understand the relationship between messages intended and messages received has been an enduring issue in teacher education. For the past three decades researchers have made forays into understanding this enduring issue, and in the process have drawn on various explanatory frameworks, one of them being socialisation. In this paper we work with Giddens' structuration theory as well as his concept of knowledgeability as analytical frameworks for understanding the relationship between messages intended (by the teacher educator) and messages received (by the student-teachers). Our discussion is informed by the findings of a study that investigated student-teachers' interpretations of the pedagogical process of a physical education teacher education course. Data generated from conversations with, and observations of, the student-teachers indicated that there was considerable “slippage” between the teacher educator's critical pedagogy inspired intentions and what was understood by the student-teachers.

The state of history and the empire of metaphysics [Review]

One of the curious things about this challenging book is that its ostensible subject— the Saxon medical and political scientist Hermann Conring (1606–1681)— is not mentioned in the title. Constantin Fasolt argues that we cannot know what Conring really thought or meant in his writings, which means that his topic cannot be Conring as such and must instead be that which occludes our knowledge of him, the titular limits of history. Given that we do in fact learn a good deal about Conring from Fasolt’s book, we can only hope that the decapitation of its subject will be rectified in a subsequent edition, or perhaps by the restorative work of librarians putting together subject headings. And yet Fasolt’s decision is understandable, for Conring is indeed a stalking-horse for a much bigger quarry: historiography and the historical consciousness. By “history” Fasolt understands a way of imposing intelligibility on the world, which is founded on the twin assumptions that the past is gone and unchangeable, and that the meaning of texts can be determined by placing them in their historical contexts (ix). In challenging this mode of intelligibility, Fasolt is not attempting to improve professiona history—it’s already as good as it can be—but to displace it. He regards his work as a declaration of “independence from historical consciousness” (32). At the same time, Fasolt insists that he is not simply jumping from historiography to philosophy, or attempting to preempt history with ontology (37-39). That has been tried by Nietzsche and Heidegger, who have been tainted by Nazism (Fasolt thinks unfairly). It has also been attempted by modern philosophers from Gadamer to Foucault and Charles Taylor who, in failing to address the “violence” that its mode of intelligibility does to the world, have not succeeded in outflanking history. Perhaps, Fasolt wonders, it is only the personal experience of those who have been subject to this violence—the experience of those who have been subject to historical examination—that can break the spell of history. Fasolt’s disclaimer notwithstanding, in the course of these remarks I shall argue that he is indeed jumping from history to philosophy, or attempting to outflank history by subjecting it to a particular metaphysical understanding. I shall do so in part by sketching the recent intellectual history of this move—a historical examination that I hope inflicts as little violence as possible on Fasolt’s argument.

'Putting up your Dukes': Statues, social memory and Duke Paoa Kahanamoku

Public statues that commemorate the lives and achievements of athletes are pervasive and influential forms of social memory in Western societies. Despite this important nexus between cultural practice and history making, there is a relative void of critical studies of statuary dedicated to athletes. This article will attempt to contribute to a broader understanding in this area by considering a bronze statue of Duke Paoa Kahanamoku, the Hawaiian Olympian, swimmer and surfer, at Waikīkī, Hawaii. This prominent monument demonstrates the processes of remembering and forgetting that are integral to acts of social memory. In this case, Kahanamoku's identity as a surfer is foregrounded over his legacy as a swimmer. The distillation and use of Kahanamoku's memory in this representation is enmeshed in deeper cultural forces about Hawaii's identity. Competing meanings of the statue's symbolism indicate its role as a 'hollow icon', and illustrate the way that apparently static objects representing the sporting past are in fact objects of the present.