text and orality

A couple of themes in the past few week's readings got me thinking about the way in which communication is built -- both in and out of texts. Teston states, about workplace documents: "Much of this scholarship uses workplace documents, or their production,
as evidence or data for better understanding how work gets done and decisions
are made. Prior to, and even during the production of workplace documents,
however, are hours’ worth of oral deliberations and debates that invariably
play a part in decision making. An investigation into the role of these knowledge-
building and decision-making processes in workplace practices—processes
that may or may not yield formal, textual documentation"...next, indicating such an exploration in scholarship "has not yet been exhausted" (303).
The initial emphasis of the Tumor Board textual document is natural, as is the disappointment when it is not a major factor in the ensuing discussions "Much to my disappointment as a researcher in writing and rhetoric studies,
however, the Tumor Board participant packet is rarely ever used in any kind of
explicit way during the conferences" (308)

How often I forget that the text evolved from other social forces. The discussions occurring were a large part of what Teston explores. This led me to revisit some of the philosophers I explored in an Educational Philosophy course last semester...forgive me, all of these rhetoricians must be old hat for you, but in placing the works from last week into some kind of context...I refer back to Plato.

"Writing, you know, Phaedrus, has this strange quality about it, which makes it really like painting: the painter's products stand before us quite as though they were alive; but if you question them, they maintain a solemn silence. So, too, with written words: you might think they spoke as though they made sense, but if you ask them anything about what they are saying, if you wish an explanation, they go on telling you the same thing, over and over forever. Once a thing is put in writing, it rolls about all over the place, falling into the hands of those who have no concern with it just as easily as under the notice of those who comprehend; it has no notion of whom to address or whom to avoid. And when it is ill-treated or abused as illegitimate, it always needs its father to help it, being quite unable to protect or help itself. "
... (enter seed analogy)
"Socr. Then he will not, when he's in earnest, resort to a written form and inscribe his seeds in water, and in inky water at that; he will not sow them with a pen, using words which are unable either to argue in their own defense when attacked or to fulfill the role of a teacher in presenting the truth. . . . In this regard, far more noble and splendid is the serious pursuit of the dialectician, who finds a congenial soul and then proceeds with true knowledge to plant and sow in it words which are able to help themselves and help him who planted them; words which will not be unproductive, for they can transmit their seed to other natures and cause the growth of fresh words in them, providing an eternal existence for their seed; words which bring their possessor to the highest degree of happiness possible for a human being to attain."
- from - (Phaedrus 67-71)
Hmmmn...sounds a lot like the following from Teston, found in her description of developing heuristics:

"Rhetoric as epistemic, however, assumes no preexisting “T”ruth, but truths
about which we collaboratively construct meaning (see Scott, 1967)—perhaps in
ways that are heuristic. Enos and Lauer (1992) argue for the ways that rhetoric is
epistemic in nature, and propose that heuristics are a way for the “rhetor and
audience to share in the determination of meaning, to engage in creating meaning
based on shared interpretive patterns” (p. 85). (314)
So, Teston refers to Enos and Lauer who document this dialectic -- through whatever medium -- in this case, orality -- to promote knowledge, in this case, best practices in discussions of the Tumor Board.

Then...this from Plato:

"If men learn this, it will implant forgetfulness in their souls; they will cease to exercise memory because they rely on that which is written, calling things to remembrance no longer from within themselves, but by means of external marks. What you have discovered is a recipe not for memory, but for reminder. And it is no true wisdom that you offer your disciples, but only its semblance, for by telling them of many things without teaching them you will make them seem to know much, while for the most part they know nothing, and as men filled, not with wisdom, but with the conceit of wisdom, they will be a burden to their fellows." - Phaedrus (275 a-b)
After rereading this, I couldn't help but flash back to the following quote from Teston (p. 318) on observational freehanding and the wish to document events that were not fitting into the existing hueristic:
"Specifically, observational free-handing is a result of returning from a Tumor
Board conference and feeling as though a good deal of what was deliberated
about that day was lost in some kind of experiential ether because the templated,
checklist-like heuristics that were deployed no longer accounted for the
kinds of deliberative events that took place during the meetings. I would later
return to the Tumor Board without a heuristic, therefore—a pencil and some
paper as my only accompaniments (see Fig. 15.6). Initially, I had hoped that by
free-handing Tumor Board observations for a visit or two, a newer, more inclusive
observational tool would be developed. Interestingly, however, and probably
due to months and months of using various observational heuristics, even when
free-handing observations, I found myself relying on some of the core categories
or key concepts that had previously been identified when using prior observational
heuristics (i.e., the letters A, B, C in Fig. 15.6 are remnants of codes used
for speakers in previous heuristics). In other words, even in the free-handing
phase of data collection, after a period of relying on heuristics, my ear and hand
were prepared to, or biased toward hearing and documenting previously defined
recurring references and connecting them with their relevant temporal and
sequential dimensions."

I am very much appreciative of Teston's piece overall...but it is the above passage, where she documents both her recognition of the need to shift her observational lense/ heuristics to account for events unfolding disappearing "experiential ether", and the difficulty she had in removing herself from the "bias toward hearing...previously defined recurring references." Reading this piece prior to my own research is valuable. I don't pretend to assume I would not assume...but this chapter highlights so clearly how this constant questioning and shifting.

Her moves to employ grounded theory as a methodology was also a powerful aspect of the peice -- it was valuable to see how this develops in her situation and how she makes confidential, mainly oral meetings accessible through the methodology.

This gives me some incentive to consider some of my past experiences -- as a Green Jobs educator in Pittsburgh (whatever, really, that is! I worked with urban kids in park and urban spaces), I became increasingly interested in reconsidering urban space -- particularly the "dregs" of the industrial belt --much going on in the Rust Belt; I just saw connections Kent is making there in terms of the recent Sustainability recognition given to Kent State's Urban Design Collaborative which works with large-scale urban vacancy issues in Cleveland: http://www.kent.edu/news/announcements/success/cudcsustainabilityaward.cfm
--need to check it out -- TIME!!! Never enough of it).

Along with investigating this, I would like to attend some neighborhood redevelopment meetings in Youngstown (I live outside of Ytown), particularly in a program called Lots of Green: "an innovative vacant land reuse program focused on comprehensively reactivating vacant land in the focus neighborhoods where YNDC operates. Lots of Green was created to address the negative conditions caused by demolition and the resulting unmaintained vacant lots. The program provides a new way of viewing vacant land as an opportunity to create productive and maintained spaces and economic opportunities for residents."

Both programs work extensively with several stakeholders...Teston gives me some measures to consider if I should attempt to discuss the ways in which knowledge is introduced, discussed, created were I to investigate either program...or a similar one. Again, I very much enjoyed the Teston piece.