Charlie Lowe was gracious enough to send me something that he’s working on about the intellectual property debate, and my initial read has already led me to re-think portions of my prospectus, especially in my conclusions regarding the implications of the work of Bruce Horner and John Trimbur for the economics of the composition classroom. Now I don’t have it all thought out, and I’m not going to write anything about what Charlie’s got in draft, which puts me in a weird situation here: I’ve got a few pages’ worth of ruminations that I don’t want to post here, because they’re based on work that’s under revision, both others’ and my own.
And that’s kind of the problem of this weblog: yes, I’ve licensed it via Creative Commons.
Not sure what that does for my picture.
But hey. There it is.
While we’re at it, let’s get the girls
too.
And here’s the difficult part:
for me, it’s OK, but my brother never said OK. And so I’ve violated a trust.
That’s how the striptease goes: yeah, you got a picture of me. And you got a picture of my brother, who I’ve never mentioned here before. And he’s a lot better-looking than I am, and a lot more charming than I am. If you’d like to write him a letter, let me know, and I’ll send you his address. He’s been in prison since 1997 for armed robbery, use of a handgun, and conspiracy. He writes letters much better than I do. (No, really: he writes letters well, and he’s a charming and intelligent man, who wishes he had more people to correspond with. He also made the front page of the Washington Post nine times in one year, as one of the charming “Brit Bandits” who were unflaggingly polite as they robbed people. If you like to write letters, paper letters, and put them in envelopes, he’s an amazing correspondent.)
Now there goes another veil. Which makes me wonder: for people who keep weblogs, where is the center? What do you not show?
This is one reason why I admire Michelle so much.
The girls are sleeping. I’m fixin to go put some Outkast on the stereo. Good night, sweet prince.
I really can’t say anything because I’m too busy smiling.
Well, you are welcome to write about what’s in my draft. It’s not like it’s unheard of in scholarship. I’ve seen scholars reference a draft which they have reviewed which has not been published. Besides, it is also based on a C&W 2003 conference presentation, so the ideas in the text have already been made public.
Meanwhile, isn’t this what weblogs, and indeed open source are all about: sharing thoughts and ideas which are under revision? For example, consider the open source developmental model explained in Eric Raymond’s The Cathedral and the Bazaar. Raymond makes the case that by releasing software often, even when it is not perfect, users are being invited to co-develop the text. So by sharing your ideas during drafting, you are inviting collaboration.
I’ve often wondered why, if students are invited to do this class, writing teachers can’t do this themselves?
OK, now I can comment semi-intelligently (got in rather late last night). Thanks, Mike, I’m sure I go too far at times but my blog is much like my life and I just muddle through. I love that you posted a photo! The girls are quite cute, too. 😉
Wow, Mike. You are exploring the risks of Internet publication. The line between the public and the private, the formal and the intimate, seems always under negotiation. Having first hand knowledge of the military system and the prison system does give you a useful perspective on the university system.
Have you discovered any class distinctions between the cats? Our cats always seemed to have elaborate rules and rituals but I could never quite figure them out.
Thanks for posting the pix. Gives context and texture to all the words I’ve been reading here.
Charlie, I’m figuring that copyright-until-it’s-published-under-a-CC-license notice is there for a reason, and it’s more a question of respect for the writer: I imagine if you want to publish it unrevised, you will, and that’s where I defer to you. For me, it’s not so much an issue of “can” as it is a question of “will”. But I did a little revision, and it’s up as my new entry, and I did indeed reference what you wrote a couple times, in a way that I think manages to respect the integrity of your work. Guess I’ll see what you have to say. 🙂
John, as far as class distinctions go, the cats are sisters from the same litter, have had the same educational opportunities (treats, the spray bottle), and receive equal pay (kibble) in the same vocation (housecat), although I’m having a hard time figuring out what the productive processes are in this household and whether or not they appropriate and distribute their own surplus labor in those productive processes. In any case, the only ways in which their class positions might differ from one another, as you make quite clear with your reference to “rules and rituals”, is in terms of cultural practices. For example, Zeugma seems to take great pleasure in digging in my houseplants and flinging the dirt around. Despite this, Tink is strangely enough the stinky one. Tink is quieter and more sedate, as well, perhaps contributing to the anthropomorphized picture of the reserved intellectual; at the same time, she breaks the “no cats on the kitchen counter” rule every time I turn around, and seems to take great paper in chewing on and shredding paper, which certainly poses a problem for me, as someone who has a lot of paper in his office. Zeugma, on the other hand, is highly physical and affectionate, insisting on frequent hugs. The difficulty with evaluating all these cultural practices, as Bourdieu would point out, is that they only have classed qualities in relation to other cultural practices. I’m afraid I can’t answer your question because to do so would suppose an a priori hierarchy of feline cultural practices standing outside the quotidian material and cultural experiences of my two girls.
But maybe I can ask the vet.
LOL! Submit that to The Onion right this moment! 🙂
The reason that the copyright notice is attached underneath the creative commons license is that I submitted that text for publication. It’s now being reviewed. But without it, anyone, including yourself, could publish it, or even rework it and publish it.
Now, once it’s officially published, then everyone is welcome to do what they want with it 🙂