 |
 |
dear all, I have just gone through the recent posts and it seems to me that there are two concerns: one, potentially productive, around the range of topics/ urgencies addressed - topics that do intersect but around which so far not much critical mass seems to be coagulating, and it seems to me that the conjunction between urgency and dispersal may be worth taking seriously, not to clarify positions necessarily but rather to shift some of the premises of the discussion. Particularly because the other concern that came out of reading the posts is one around the role of protocols/ formats (and in that sense also 'turns'). In centering our discussion around models, forms of delivery, formats and frameworks, are we not also implicitly naturalising the increasingly scripted formalisation of education as paradigm for expanded practice? Or, to put it differently, is not the focus on the infrastructural/ institutional discussion itself prolonging the coercive family/ school (tv, art) axis around education as procedural subjection? It would seem to me that this is an important point of convergence between the discussions around educational formats and conceptualisations of curating, too: The urgency for both may indeed lie in finding/ recognising registers of engagement that allow to consider the lateral/ oblique dynamics and effects of such situations. Educational situations and encounters with curatorial propositions cannot be thought exclusively from the perspective of an offering. By and large, tensions and dynamics tend to be generated in oblique take-ups, through opposition to what is on offer, through mis-using propositions or indeed through simple dis-regard. To insist on such emancipation offers another axis that allows to challenge, re-frame and/or disregard some of the dominant tendencies of the current debate. And it seems to me that it would be very useful to account for such dynamics at least as a corrective suspicion, if not a hinge toward different uses of the current crisis. best for now, edgar