Jack, you wrote about four aspects that you would like some critical 
feedback on. And although I said your talk was beyond criticism, I am 
delighted (!) to offer some analytical/critical ideas, because in fact 
your four ideas gave me pause for thought. So, first, the ideas to remind 
me as I write: 
i) the importance of the gaze of recognition of the being of the other,
ii) the relationally dynamic awareness of inclusionality with flows of  
life-affirming energy,
iii) creating living educational theories within the living boundaries  
of cultures of resistance,
iv) including in our living theories of our learning difficulties  
encountered in educational enquiries that have required persistence in  
the face of pressures that could have discouraged and constrained the  
full expression of our values.

I just want to concentrate on the first three ideas above in my response. 
I hope it's useful, Jack.

I've just watched the video again for the fourth time. And I want to 
concentrate on 3:16 - 3:21. Just a few seconds. Because as I just watched 
them, I saw something that seemed to me to point to the whole of what you 
were searching for. You are elaborating on an idea. You are using your 
body-language fulsomely to express yourself deeply. Then you clearly see 
someone who seems to be trying to catch your attention. You immediately 
stop and ask, and then, after determining the person is not wanting to ask 
a question (I am supposing) you carry on.

I have long held the belief that our actions carry our values very 
strongly, and that if we were sticks of rock, when cut in two our values 
would be seen to be written through every chunk! In a gestalt sort of way 
I believe that every single action we take describes our deeper values. 
Something 'gives us away'. Or like the Big Bang Theory that everything 
contained in the universe now was contained in the singularity at the 
beginning of the universe in one form or another. 

Something riveted my attention at 3:16 - 3:21 and when I read the above 
questions again, I knew why. The first one about the gaze of recognition 
of the being of the other is something I cannot wholly comment on, and am 
having to infer from only seeing your side of the picture, so to speak. 
However, from seeing you and hearing you at these moments I am captivated 
by your willingness to put on hold something you are passionate about 
because a bigger passion intercedes: people matter. You can go back to 
your earlier thoughts, but you need to pay attention to this person. Why? 
Because this is a person you are addressing - and like the example you 
give of the woman injured on 7th July 2005 - each human being is a human 
being worthy of notice. I am deeply impressed by the way you do this. I 
know you, Jack, and I know when you get excited by ideas and your whole 
body goes into almost convulsions of eagerness. And yet you stop the flow. 
You pause. You allow the needs of the other to supercede - for the moment -
 your express desire to communicate some ideas. This is the art of the 
dialectician being played right in front of us. And right after those 
moments you talk about living your values! Very timely And one of your 
values is about respecting others (which I take to be what you are getting 
at in accordance with the first two of your above ideas) and you show 
this/these so clearly to my mind in these few seconds.

The third one is interesting in relation to these moments. It seems to me 
that your life-force is in full flow during these moments, in the way in 
which you accommodate the 'questioner' into the very flow of your dynamic. 
The questioner wasn't so much contradicting your flow, but you neatly 
accommodated the 'interruption' into your own purposes. That isn't to say 
in any inappropriate or controlling fashion, but so confident were you (it 
seems) that you could be completely open to whatever came your way. Now in 
a sense that has been the process of your own professional development. 
You have sustained your own sense of moral, ethical, epistemological and I 
daresay ontological purposes whatever pressures have been put on you from 
the hierarchical institutions within which you - and so many others as you 
say in the talk - have worked. You were in those moments demonstrating 
your own living theory, which consisted/consists in a kind of constructive 
compliance with circumstances in order to enable those values you care 
most about to come more fully into the world. Those values, as constituted 
also in those moments from 3:16 - 3:21, are manifestly about a passion for 
education, care for the other, intellectual rigour, kindness, fun, and 
exuding a life-affirming energy.

I enjoyed the whole lecture - and have noted to you elsewhere a living 
contradiction in the way you sometimes, whilst (possibly!) listening to 
questions, make more eye-contact with the technology than the speaker! - 
but that aside. I enjoyed it all, but those few moments alluded to above 
seemed to me to be ripe with meaning and significance.

I am eager to see now, Jack, how you take these ideas forward in the light 
of recent university judgements. I am fascinated by the way you have made 
creative compliance into an art form!

Love from,