we/figureitout
4
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

!publish!

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Valeria Graziano 2024-11-07 10:11:08 +01:00
parent e86196fe61
commit 0ea00d4f7f
1 changed files with 4 additions and 4 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

8
content/inquiry/snadisedruze.md
View file

@ -12,11 +12,11 @@ annexes = ["abecedaire.md"]
# Introduction # Introduction
*…where we give an overview of the concerns behind the ‘Figure It Out’ inquiry, the politics and ethics informing the stories of popular illegalisms and ingenuities, theories and key concepts shared in this zine, introduce our subject matter, storytelling and bonfires as methodology, and the ethics of refusal that underwrites it all…. If you are impatient to read the stories, go directly to one of the bonfires and you'll find the stories there… though, heavily redacted to preserve anonymity of those living through systems failure.* *where we give an overview of the concerns behind our inquiry, introduce our subject matter of popular illegalisms and ingenuities, storytelling and bonfires as methodology, and the ethics of refusal that underwrites it all. If you’re eager to dive right into the stories, head to the bonfires, where you’ll find them—though heavily redacted to preserve the anonymity of those living through systems failure. To uncover key concepts and explore the myriad ways folks colloquially capture the art of ‘figuring it out,’ visit the abécédaire section, where these expressions and ideas are laid out, complete with a library of references to deepen your exploration. *
Figure it Out (FIO) is an artistic and research project engaging practices and phenomena of coping, tinkering, making-do, and circumventing exclusions that are developed by marginalized, underserved, discriminated, and vulnerable people. Gendered, racialized, bordered, disabled, and exploited, these constituencies are often forced to develop tools and strategies that are considered unacceptable to the institutions of the system. Sometimes these tools and strategies are forged out of necessity, of survival, sometimes to exercise rights or to secure access to basic services available to those deemed more “deserving”. Other times, these coping mechanisms reclaim rest, beauty, or pleasure as part of a dignified life. What FIO practices and phenomena have in common is that they are not about scamming peers or those more vulnerable than them. Instead, they are practices that take issue with formalized, normative forms of oppression (state, welfare institutions, corporations, workplace, credit, housing, utilities etc.) that have sets of rules and conditions of access that specific populations or individuals cannot meet. They are actions directed at the conditions that produce and reproduce systemic violence and which reformist approaches aim to fix in the long run. Fio practices instead inhabit different temporalities from the perspective of those who cannot and will not wait. In their urgency, they open up spaces where different ethical practices can emerge, where knowledges are passed on in ways that complicate claims to a universal and transparent public sphere. Figure it Out (FIO) is an artistic and research project engaging practices and phenomena of coping, tinkering, making-do, and circumventing exclusions that are developed by marginalized, underserved, discriminated, and vulnerable people. Gendered, racialized, bordered, disabled, and exploited, these constituencies are often forced to develop tools and strategies that are considered unacceptable to the institutions of the system. Sometimes these tools and strategies are forged out of necessity, of survival, sometimes to exercise rights or to secure access to basic services available to those deemed more “deserving”. Other times, these coping mechanisms reclaim rest, beauty, or pleasure as part of a dignified life. What FIO practices and phenomena have in common is that they are not about scamming peers or those more vulnerable than them. Instead, they are practices that take issue with formalized, normative forms of oppression (state, welfare institutions, corporations, workplace, credit, housing, utilities etc.) that have sets of rules and conditions of access that specific populations or individuals cannot meet. They are actions directed at the conditions that produce and reproduce systemic violence and which reformist approaches aim to fix in the long run. Fio practices instead inhabit different temporalities from the perspective of those who cannot and will not wait. In their urgency, they open up spaces where different ethical practices can emerge, where knowledges are passed on in ways that complicate claims to a universal and transparent public sphere.
![](static/images/a_uma_um.jpg) ![](static/images/through_the_fingers.jpg)
## Cheating, Lying, Stealing ## Cheating, Lying, Stealing
@ -61,6 +61,8 @@ Moreover, given the criminalized, transgressive, or quasi-illegal nature of many
A final po-ethic dispositive that was key in shaping the bonfire storytellings has been the laughter. Henri Bergson’s seminal work on laughter saw it as a mechanism for making a space of collectivity “[o]ur laughter is always the laughter of a group”. Moreover, he proposed that it serves as a social corrective, a means of revealing the absurdity of hierarchical and strict social structures.[^14] In our context, laughter operates not merely as a response but as an active engagement with power dynamics, embodying a subversive pleasure in exposing and circumventing systemic injustices. While Bergson viewed laughter as a collective social corrective, Franco Berardi’s reflections on cynicism and irony suggest another layer to this dynamic: Neither the cynic nor the ironist “believes in the true foundation of law,” yet each navigates this disbelief differently: “the cynical person bends to the law while mocking its false and pretentious values, while the ironic person escapes the law altogether, creating a linguistic space where law has no effectiveness.”[^15] If the whys behind the anecdotes are often tragic as they reveal the systemic injustices that shape impossible conditions of living, the hows often evoke a giggle that positions the participants vis-a-vis power structures: the affect of joy felt when hearing about a way to escape an unjust system reveals lines of partisanship that might not even be known to those laughing before the event. Such moments of shared chuckles during storytelling undermined the isolating effects that the power structures have on acts usually performed in secret and deemed illegal. A final po-ethic dispositive that was key in shaping the bonfire storytellings has been the laughter. Henri Bergson’s seminal work on laughter saw it as a mechanism for making a space of collectivity “[o]ur laughter is always the laughter of a group”. Moreover, he proposed that it serves as a social corrective, a means of revealing the absurdity of hierarchical and strict social structures.[^14] In our context, laughter operates not merely as a response but as an active engagement with power dynamics, embodying a subversive pleasure in exposing and circumventing systemic injustices. While Bergson viewed laughter as a collective social corrective, Franco Berardi’s reflections on cynicism and irony suggest another layer to this dynamic: Neither the cynic nor the ironist “believes in the true foundation of law,” yet each navigates this disbelief differently: “the cynical person bends to the law while mocking its false and pretentious values, while the ironic person escapes the law altogether, creating a linguistic space where law has no effectiveness.”[^15] If the whys behind the anecdotes are often tragic as they reveal the systemic injustices that shape impossible conditions of living, the hows often evoke a giggle that positions the participants vis-a-vis power structures: the affect of joy felt when hearing about a way to escape an unjust system reveals lines of partisanship that might not even be known to those laughing before the event. Such moments of shared chuckles during storytelling undermined the isolating effects that the power structures have on acts usually performed in secret and deemed illegal.
![](static/images/a_uma_um.jpg)
## Ethics of refusal ## Ethics of refusal
@ -70,8 +72,6 @@ The practice of ethnographic refusal presented us with a powerful toolbox to ori
A strategy of refusal starts with an exhortation to move the focus of research away from individuals and communities positioned as "social problems" and towards institutions and power structures. By examining policies, practices, and historical forces that create and maintain inequality, ethnographic refusal aims to disrupt the cycle of objectification and exploitation inherent in traditional research. Predominant research approaches often focus on "pain and humiliation," commodifying these narratives for authorial gain while failing to offer substantial benefits to those around which the study is centered. This demand for "pain stories" perpetuates harmful power dynamics, turning research into a form of "inquiry as invasion." Furthermore, the pursuit of objectivity, often driven by those in power, can obscure the ethical implications of research and further stigmatize the subjects of the study. In this sense, in FIO we sought to challenge this paradigm by acknowledging the inherent power imbalances in the relationships that underpin the sharing of the stories. Moreover, proponents of ethnographic refusal highlight the importance of recognizing and honoring refusals from participants, for example by respecting instances where research participants choose to withhold information or decline to engage with certain lines of inquiry. These refusals, often communicated through coded language or silence, represent an assertion of sovereignty over knowledge and experience. Thus, we strive to understand and interpret these acts of resistance, even if it means limiting the scope of our inquiry and interactions. A strategy of refusal starts with an exhortation to move the focus of research away from individuals and communities positioned as "social problems" and towards institutions and power structures. By examining policies, practices, and historical forces that create and maintain inequality, ethnographic refusal aims to disrupt the cycle of objectification and exploitation inherent in traditional research. Predominant research approaches often focus on "pain and humiliation," commodifying these narratives for authorial gain while failing to offer substantial benefits to those around which the study is centered. This demand for "pain stories" perpetuates harmful power dynamics, turning research into a form of "inquiry as invasion." Furthermore, the pursuit of objectivity, often driven by those in power, can obscure the ethical implications of research and further stigmatize the subjects of the study. In this sense, in FIO we sought to challenge this paradigm by acknowledging the inherent power imbalances in the relationships that underpin the sharing of the stories. Moreover, proponents of ethnographic refusal highlight the importance of recognizing and honoring refusals from participants, for example by respecting instances where research participants choose to withhold information or decline to engage with certain lines of inquiry. These refusals, often communicated through coded language or silence, represent an assertion of sovereignty over knowledge and experience. Thus, we strive to understand and interpret these acts of resistance, even if it means limiting the scope of our inquiry and interactions.
![](static/images/through_the_fingers.jpg)
By implementing these strategies and remaining attentive to the ethical and political dimensions of our research, tracing the stories in the e-zine has made use of two approaches. The first is the inclusion of a note specifying the context in which the story was first encountered. This process wants to draw attention to the relational conditions of the telling and of the retelling. By implementing these strategies and remaining attentive to the ethical and political dimensions of our research, tracing the stories in the e-zine has made use of two approaches. The first is the inclusion of a note specifying the context in which the story was first encountered. This process wants to draw attention to the relational conditions of the telling and of the retelling.
The second dispositive was inspired by "blackout poetry," a technique that involves taking a page of preexisting text (typically a few pages from a newspaper, book, or any other printed source) and blacking out with a black or otherwise dark color most of the words, leaving only a select few words or sentences that create a new meaning when read in order. This approach uses the redaction of the stories as a way to mask sensitive information and make them unavailable for access while at the same time allowing readers to remain aware of their presence and importance. The second dispositive was inspired by "blackout poetry," a technique that involves taking a page of preexisting text (typically a few pages from a newspaper, book, or any other printed source) and blacking out with a black or otherwise dark color most of the words, leaving only a select few words or sentences that create a new meaning when read in order. This approach uses the redaction of the stories as a way to mask sensitive information and make them unavailable for access while at the same time allowing readers to remain aware of their presence and importance.