Sabbatical’s rhythms have taken much getting used to. Early-day starts, writing from 6-11 a.m. worked okay for a few days. Then a headcold stuffedcold, a couple of blergy-meh days through which I could justify holding close the couch’s cushions. So supportive a couch. And into the most recent week, work obligations, trips to campus almost every day. Snowslop given to rain-washed-snowslop has thrown sideways all outdoor running routines (NNSA: Need new shoes, anyway); the campus pool will have me any time I will have it, and I managed to splash across a half mile or so Thursday evening before Is.’s basketball practice at St. Luke’s–the first practice of the season.
But the writing, even as it’s happening, it’s the sort of textural consistency of the second half of a bag of whatever brand corn chips, recognizable even if registering as too predictable and familiar and constant a flavor–academic writing wanting ghost pepper salsa (face-melting, January-melting heat to go along with). Sabbaticals have a binge-like quality and I’ve noticed the sharp shift in a sociality (around writing) that offers solitude and awayness as amenable to productive foci, rhythms, and attentions. Writing group? Yeah, maybe.
Not sure I can say with good-enough accuracy what the accumulative wordcount is right now. A chapter is developing, probably just under 5k words in, with the second half’s sections more conceptually clear to me because they accord well with recent conference presentations on turn spotting. And the digital installation–the motion chart–has been in sight for several years now; it wants more data fed into it, but that’s doable, amounting to a few more coding sessions. Not that the explanation of its methods and its making, much less the analysis and focal examples require the extra data. The motion chart wants it, is all.
And the week was also punctuated by settling the details for a talk at MTSU in early March, a talk and workshop, both, which I’m looking forward to with the right ideas, the right energy. Disciplinary Discourse Networks 1984/2014, the title a play on Kittler’s epochal media archaeology. And not that I will have time to develop the threads to Kittler in any especially explicit ways, it’s enough to make the theoretical nod, especially as it gets at methods, modeling, and eras in disciplinary emergence: discourse communities flourished in the 1980s because structuralism (including infra- and post- prefixed -structuralism) was especially upset and churning. Much more to this distinction, more than I’ll labor through here (or in the talk, for that matter); suffice it to say that we’re readier than we’ve been in some time to create the simple visual models that accord with insights into disciplinary discourse networks–semantic, bibliographic, affinity-based, choric, career-emplaced, and so on. And particularly for newcomers, I hope growing compulsions toward depth and complexity fetishism (qua ecology fascination-asms) don’t entirely occlude these simple visual models and what’s especially generative in what they do, the framing they provide, the footings they sponsor, and so on.