it is correct, or at least ethical behavior, as it has answerability
to it. It is for Aristotle a bit rash.
it is a general phenomenon. Since 9/11 and PATRIOT act there is email
surveillance
The west Wild myth is pretty much fizzling out. Across the street
from our 3-horse ranch, they sold the Bureau of land management Land
to two developers. Where to ride? Where to walk in the dessert once
it is all lawns, sidewalks and pavement? The usual democratic
process of City and County working all the details with the
developers, and then inviting citizen participation, if you are
willing to set for 6 hours through meeting then get 5 minutes to
talk. Few are that persistent. it is endemic to U.S. process
AACORN is awesome support. There are more brilliant ideas flowing
here. i love the aesthetic way of sensing. it is healthy discussion,
even enlightening. keep it up
david
signing as private citizen, not as university employee
On Apr 13, 2007, at 1:35 AM, David Weir wrote:
> -Hi David;
> your last message rang a warning bell, especially this last section.
> I quote from your message, where you say:
>
> "I am not allowed to use university email to be a voice in my own
> university. I violate policy just by sending this message.
>
> Yet, it is worth that risk
>
> David Boje
> speaking as private citizen, not as member of my own university, not
> as member of Academy, just as human being.
> My university reads and audits our email. So be it."
>
> Some questions.
> Can this be correct behaviour for a University?
> Is this a general phenomenon?
> Is this the "freedom of speech" for which "The West" is apparently
> famed?
> What support can Aacorn give?
>
> Surely it is freedom of expression that unites the artist and the
> scholar?
> Well, if so, we have an issue now!
> A luta Continua.
> David
>
> ---- Start Original Message -----
> Sent: Thu, 12 Apr 2007 11:07:42 -0700
> From: David Boje <[log in to unmask]>
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Art's place in organization studies -- finding the
> middle path
>
>> I have been asked to write a piece for Org Science, a response to an
>> article I reviewed and rejected at Academy of Management Review. The
>> article I rejected was accepted without one single change to it.
>> Another reviewer at AMR also had rejected it. We were amazed Org
>> Science would take it without changes.
>>
>> On Steve's topic of how beautiful to write a review for Org Science.
>> I think it begs the question of whether beauty of discourse is what
>> the ways of discourse of organizations are about. To me, and
>> strictly by personal view, is org discourse is pretty ugly, spam-
>> ridden, over-simplified, sales hype, spin and more spin that dare i
>> say is quite manipulative, even if some ad agency and pr firm says
>> its 'beautiful.' Perhaps I walk on the dark side of critical theory,
>> critical discourse, and every other critical discipline. I am
>> reminded of Herbert Marcuse, One-Dimensional Man book where only the
>> discourse of positivity (& beauty) and only the Org Sci discourse
>> that trashes all critical social science is admitted into the
>> official arena (exceptions are made, I exaggerate for effect, yet I
>> do not believe OS has much a critical aesthetic currency, yet it is
>> very highly rated among journals of appreciative positivity).
>>
>> It would be neat to establish a beautiful organization. Sorry all I
>> see and experience are organizations making people miserable, people
>> caught up in psychic prisons of shame (a move from Morgan's metaphor
>> paradigm to Chris Poulson's shame paradigm). To me, and this is me,
>> my two cents, are organizations full of process addictions and
>> process addicts, where the biggest addict sits a top what someone
>> once called the Phrog Farm, the biggest addict rules the co-
>> dependents, in spaces of workaholism, ragaholic, and what Ken Smith
>> and others call the inter-group.
>>
>> How is writing on beauty of organization possible in a society
>> addicted to war, fear, greed, the Wal-Mart effect, Disneyfication
>> (the production of spectacle as beauty substitute), barbie-driven
>> body surgery, and what sociologist George Ritzer calls
>> McDonaldization. I drive down the streets seeing this spectacle of
>> horror, and how could anyone write of beautiful. More writing like
>> Upton Sinclar, more Rachael Carson, more Dante, and more Rabelais.
>>
>> There is too much beauty writing, too much deference to Org Science,
>> too little walking on the darkside. I am turning from Kantian to
>> Aristotle ethics. Aristotle in his book on ethics, asked about taking
>> the middle path, not a compromise path, but a way in-between good and
>> evil, virtue and vice, rash and cowardly --- to find the courageous
>>
>> I miss the Fringe Cafe, and did not go to last to Academy of
>> Management. I protest their refusal to have an Art's division, a
>> place for a critical aesthetics, amidst what Debord calls the
>> Spectacle (Baudrillard appropriated as simulacra). Who needs science
>> without art? Who needs academy science that cannot come up with a
>> position on ethics in the Enron era. Too much celebration of beauty,
>> not enough critical studies. Yes, there is a Critical management
>> studies area, some, on the fringe work in critical aesthetics, but
>> the main ballroom, the main theatre stages of Org Studies, and
>> Academy are devoid of critical art.
>>
>> My answer, and it's just me, to Daved's question, is a Business Arts
>> Academy would deploy the art of the Situationist, critique the way
>> way the business of corporatization that ruined health as a place of
>> care in the U.S. is not doing corporatization of the university. My
>> university is as state university, and under the corporatization
>> model, is converting line faculty positions to money-raising
>> positions, doing 'sanding' of janitor positions in possible and
>> alleged retaliation to employees unionizing the university.
>> Administrators are expanding and bloating budgets. Its a crazy
>> system. Class sizes getting bigger, fewer faculty, more let's patent
>> some science-types invention, or write a grant to bring in federal
>> dollars to increase surveillance in the climate of fear.
>>
>> I am not allowed to use university email to be a voice in my own
>> university. I violate policy just by sending this message.
>>
>> Yet, it is worth that risk
>>
>> David Boje
>> speaking as private citizen, not as member of my own university, not
>> as member of Academy, just as human being.
>> My university reads and audits our email. So be it.
>>
>>
>> On Apr 12, 2007, at 8:30 AM, Steve Taylor wrote:
>>
>>> I recently had the experience of a reviewer (for Organization
>>> Science)
>>> telling me that my writing should be more beautiful. The
>>> reviewer was
>>> suggesting that if I was serious about aesthetics than the
>>> reviewers should
>>> be judging the writing on beauty. I tend to agree. Unfortunately
>>> for me
>>> that didn't mean they weren't also applying more traditional
>>> criteria, so it
>>> translates into the bar being that much higher. But I have to say
>>> that I am
>>> okay with this because it does open the door for including artistic
>>> criteria
>>> in the assessment.
>>>
>>> Personally, when I hear Daved's question, I find myself more
>>> interested in
>>> what would businesses that have taken seriously the idea of
>>> management as an
>>> art look like? I have dreams of leaders and managers caring as
>>> much about
>>> whether their actions are beautiful (or comic or sublime or whatever
>>> aesthetic category they aspire to) as they care about whether they
>>> will
>>> produce profit and are doing the right thing. For me that would be
>>> a really
>>> interesting triple bottom line - artistic, moral, and aesthetic
>>> results.
>>>
>>> Just waiting for today's snow storm,
>>>
>>> Steve
>>>
>>>
>>> On 4/9/07 1:38 PM, "Daved Barry" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I'm not sure what other things might change. I'd really welcome
>>>> more of
>>>> these 'what would/could a Business Arts Academy look like?'
>>>> scenarios from
>>>> the rest of you--it's a good exercise I think. And maybe it will
>>>> help whisk
>>>> things on their way. Teike, Philippe, Henrik, Claus (and others of
>>>> you who
>>>> are professionally trained artists getting MOS PhDs) . . . you're
>>>> in a good
>>>> position to say something about this! Lucy? Deborah? Vicki? Brad?
>>>> Eric? Some
>>>> of you other SCOS denizens as well ;-)--Steve Linstead, Heather? D
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Steven S. Taylor, PhD
>>> Assistant Professor
>>> Worcester Polytechnic Institute
>>> Department of Management
>>> 100 Institute Rd
>>> Worcester, MA 01609
>>> USA
>>> +1 508-831-5557
>>> [log in to unmask]
>>
>
> ----- End Original Message -----
|