mapping interference section drafted

interference.html

@@ -353,19 +353,21 @@
 </div>
 
 <br>
+
 <!--mapping interference-->
 <div>
   <a name="mapping-interference" id="mapping-interference"></a> 
 <p>
  <span style="font-weight:700">MAPPING INTERFERENCE </span><br>
- Post qualitative inquiry refuses the capture of method entirely; it "must be invented, created differently each time… The goal of post qualitative inquiry is not to systematically repeat a preexisting research reprocess to produce[sic] a recognizable result but to experiment and create something new and different that might <i>not</i> be recognizable in existing structures of intelligibility" (St. Pierre 2021a, 5-6, emphasis in original). It was through writing her dissertation that Elizabeth St. Pierre first encountered the incommensurabilities between humanist qualitative methodology and poststructural theories (St. Pierre 2018, 603). St. Pierre (2018) describes how normalized it was in graduate school to first pick a set of (qualitative) methods with which to gather data, then apply the theory one was reading to the data gathered. Upon reflection and the thinking immanent to writing, St. Pierre realized her methodological choice to conduct in-person interviews valorized a speaking subject, presence, and the primacy of language in a manner antithetical to the theory she sought to apply. In short, St. Pierre discovered "conventional humanist qualitative methodological concepts like <i>interview</i>, the <i>field</i>, and <i>data</i>" (2018, 606, emphasis in original) to be unintelligible within her poststructural theoretical framework.
+ Post qualitative inquiry refuses the capture of method entirely; it "must be invented, created differently each time… The goal of post qualitative inquiry is not to systematically repeat a preexisting research reprocess to produce[sic] a recognizable result but to experiment and create something new and different that might <i>not</i> be recognizable in existing structures of intelligibility" (St. Pierre 2021a, 6, emphasis in original). It was through writing her dissertation that Elizabeth St. Pierre first encountered the incommensurabilities between humanist qualitative methodology and poststructural theories (St. Pierre 2018, 603). St. Pierre (2018) describes how normalized it was in graduate school to first pick a set of (qualitative) methods with which to gather data, then apply the theory one was reading to the data gathered. Upon reflection and the thinking immanent to writing, St. Pierre realized her methodological choice to conduct in-person interviews valorized a speaking subject, presence, and the primacy of language in a manner antithetical to the theory she sought to apply. In short, St. Pierre discovered "conventional humanist qualitative methodological concepts like <i>interview</i>, the <i>field</i>, and <i>data</i>" (2018, 606, emphasis in original) to be unintelligible within her poststructural theoretical framework.
  </p>
+
  <p>
-  I have encountered a similar conundrum in making sense of data as it is made legible by geographic information systems and Cartesian cartography on the one hand, and embodied spatial practices and sensory methodologies on the other. It began with question sparked by a panel I was invited to present on concerned with infrastructures and affective orientations of data. Reading the panel's call, I realized data was taken for granted as an empirical formation. So I asked myself what <i>is</i> data? Much of my deep mapping fieldwork has involved navigating Vancouver, my empirics emerging as inextricable layerings of sensorium, affect, and infrastructure. During my thesis research I have worked as a Teaching Assistant for a departmental cartography course, completed GIS research assistance, and performed freelance cartography. I also continue to work in the university library Research Commons, where I teach and consult on geospatial matters. One of the workshops I led last year was on building walkability indexes with QGIS (“Network Analysis,” n.d.). Geospatial data are data for which a locational property, such as coordinate or street address, is measured. A walkability index is a quantitative assessment of the relative accessibility of amenities within a delineated area. The library's workshop assumed as its empirics geospatial datasets which render the city down from above as a collection of points, lines, and polygons. Indeed, it was possible to make the index without any reference to on-the-ground, everyday navigations. Given geospatial data representing Vancouver's city blocks, population density, and amenities, GIS provides the tools to analyze proximity and connection, as well as visualize the result through a map.
+  I have encountered a similar conundrum in making sense of data as it is made legible by geographic information systems (GIS) and Cartesian cartography on the one hand, and embodied spatial practices and sensory methodologies on the other. It began with question sparked by a panel concerned with infrastructures and affective orientations of data. Reading the panel's call, I realized data was taken for granted as an empirical formation. So I asked myself what <i>is</i> data? Much of my deep mapping fieldwork has involved navigating Vancouver, my empirics emerging as inextricable layerings of sensorium, affect, and infrastructure. During my thesis research I have worked as a Teaching Assistant for a departmental cartography course, completed GIS research assistance, and performed freelance cartography. I also continue to work in the university library Research Commons, where I teach and consult on geospatial matters. One of the workshops I led last year was on building walkability indexes with QGIS (“Network Analysis,” 2023). Geospatial data are data for which a locational property, such as coordinate or street address, is measured. A walkability index is a quantitative assessment of the relative accessibility of amenities within a delineated area. The library's workshop assumed as its empirics geospatial datasets which render the city down from above as a collection of points, lines, and polygons. Indeed, it was possible to make the index without any reference to on-the-ground, everyday navigations. Given geospatial data representing Vancouver's city blocks, population density, and amenities, GIS provides the tools to analyze proximity and connection, as well as visualize the result through a map.
   </p>
 
 <p>
-  I began drafting my response to the panel's call overlooking the mudflats beside the Tsleil-Waututh Nation community and village site. Today, the Maplewood Flats provincial conservation area and wild bird sanctuary occupies the traditional and unceded territory of the Tsleil-Waututh Nation (“Visit Maplewood Flats:The North Shore’s Only Wild Bird Sanctuary” 2024).  On a log overlooking Parkland's fuel refinery (“The Burnaby Refinery” 2023), I wondered: How are empirics made legible as data by the apparatuses that produce them? How are technoscientific and affective orientations to ‘what counts as data’ co-constitutive of an empirical account of the city?
+  I began drafting my response to the panel's call overlooking the mudflats beside the Tsleil-Waututh Nation community and village site. Today, the Maplewood Flats provincial conservation area and wild bird sanctuary occupies the traditional and unceded territory of the Tsleil-Waututh Nation (“Visit Maplewood Flats” 2024). On a log bench overlooking Parkland's fuel refinery (“The Burnaby Refinery” 2023), I wondered: How are empirics made legible as data by the apparatuses that produce them? How are technoscientific and affective orientations to ‘what counts as data’ co-constitutive of an empirical account of the city?
 </p>
 
 <!--maplewood flats sitation-->
@@ -379,51 +381,49 @@
 </div>
 <br><br>
 <p>
-  Writes St. Pierre (2018), "data appeared in my dreams, in my body, and in memories" (606). Some nights I continue to unfold a thought in my sleep, organizing and reorganizing the paper I was working on during the day. One morning I woke up and scribbled on a post-it:
+  Writes St. Pierre (2018), "I had certainly "collected" official "data" during official "fieldwork," but data appeared in dreams, in my body, and in memories" (606). Some nights I continue to unfold a thought in my sleep, organizing and reorganizing the paper I was working on during the day. One morning I scribbled on a post-it:
+<br>
 </p>
 
 <!--dreams data-->
 <div class="vignette" style="width:50%; margin:auto">
-  3 nights now I've woken 3 hours after falling asleep, the conceptual debris which all day circled my mind in an undifferentiated cloud suddenly cohered into orbits such that fully formed sentences carry me from unconscious to consciousness. delta brainwaves. 
+  3 nights now I've woken 3 hours after falling asleep, the conceptual debris which all day circled my mind in an undifferentiated cloud suddenly cohered into orbits such that fully formed sentences carry me from unconscious to consciousness. delta brainwaves.
   </div>
 
-  <p>What counts as data (without further justification) is often determined by whether the methods employed and fieldsite were already intelligible/legible within the discipline/academy. St. Pierre (2018) describes writing an "aside" about a dream she had involving her study participant. The last sentence she wrote, or which she "did not intentionally write—it wrote itself"  was "The aside is the field" (St. Pierre 2018, 605, emphasis in original). This served as the refrain (Deleuze and Guattari 1987) of St. Pierre's dissertation. Long before I encountered postqualitative inquiry, the refrain of my master's has been 'its all the field'.
-
-  <br><br>
-  about linearity, site
+  <p>
+    St. Pierre (2018) describes writing an "aside" about a dream she had involving her study participant. The last sentence she wrote, or which she "did not intentionally write—<i>it wrote itself</i>"  was "The aside is the field" (St. Pierre 2018, 605, emphasis in original). This became the refrain (Deleuze and Guattari 1987) of St. Pierre's dissertation. Long before I encountered postqualitative inquiry, the refrain of my master's began as 'It's all the field'.
 </p>
 
-  <p>Writes Eric Magrane of geopoetics:</p>
-<!--geopoetics sitation-->
-<div  style="width:46%; overflow:scroll; margin:auto">
+  <!-- <p>
+    The 'when' and 'where' of St. Pierre's field were complicated by the fact that it was her hometown.  being her hometown. her dissertation fieldwork St. Pierre The official field of St. Pierre's dissertation was her hometown. Not only is my theorization of deep mapping diffracted through my practice of deep mapping and my praxis of deep mapping diffracted through my theorization of deep mapping, my practice of deep mapping is diffracted through every other practice I've undertaken past and present.  [don't know if I should go into details] Like St. Pierre, "I made the field as I  wrote" (2018, 606). I am reminded of how Eric Magrane speaks of geopoetics:</p>
+    <br> -->
+
+<!-- <div  style="width:46%; overflow:scroll; margin:auto">
   <img src="./media/commonplace/Magrane2015_95.png" style="width: 100%">
   <img src="./media/commonplace/Magrane2015_96.png" style="width: 100%">
   <br>
   <span style="font-size:12px;"><b>Site x</b> (Magrane 2015, 95-96)
   </span>
   <br>
-</div>
+</div> -->
 
-<p>
+<!-- <p>
   > geopoetics as spacing. -> sense making, grasping - knowing as dist practice here hmmm
   could put that up here???
-</p>
+</p> -->
 
 <p>
-  I resonate with St. Pierre (2018), drawing form Richardson (1994), that "...writing is also an empirical field of inquiry" (605). As I write this section, the section above is loosely mapped out but uncertain. With a ballpoint pen I write in the margin of the St. Pierre piece: "Is a diffractive reading the most generative way to approach 'incommensurable' methodologies?" Are technoscientific and affective practices of engaging place, producing geographic knowledge, and rendering spatial research public incommensurable precisely because they have mutually exclusive onto-epistemologies, i.e. "descriptions of human being, language, discourse, power, agency, resistance, freedom, and so on" (St. Pierre 2018, 603)? And if they are incommensurable, is "resistance to top-down data practices" (the call for contributions to the panel mentioned above) by  positioning so-called top-down and bottom-up apparatuses in opposition to one another the most generative framing? Thinking with my ongoing work in Cartesian cartography, GIS, and deep mapping, I have grown critical of academic framings that render so-called 'top-down' and 'bottom-up' mapping practices in opposition to one another. Both are boundary making practices for configuring worlds. What matters is the effect of their differential articulations of what gets to count––what is included in the frame of an empirical formation. 'Top down' and 'bottom up' mapping practices simply perform different agential cuts, the effects of which do not oppose one another but overlap in the everyday, their interference constituting the entangled viscera of urban bodies as they are rendered differentially intelligible. A perhaps more generative way of relating them would be to read them through one another. 
+  I resonate with St. Pierre (2018), drawing from Richardson (1994), that "...writing is also an empirical field of inquiry" (605). As I write this section, the section above is loosely mapped out but uncertain. With a ballpoint pen I write in the margin of the St. Pierre piece: "Is a diffractive reading the most generative way to engage 'incommensurable' methodologies?" Are technoscientific and affective orientations to engaging place, producing geographic knowledge, and rendering spatial research public incommensurable precisely because they have mutually exclusive onto-epistemologies, i.e. "descriptions of human being, language, discourse, power, agency, resistance, freedom, and so on" (St. Pierre 2018, 603)? The above mentioned panel on infrastructures and affective orientations of data invited "interventions at the intersection of space and data, exploring critical geographies and the city to offer critique, alternatives, and grounds for resistance to top-down practices for imagining and managing today's cities" ("177. Infrastructures and Affective Orientations of Data" 2023). Thinking with my ongoing work in Cartesian cartography, GIS, and deep mapping, I have grown critical of academic framings that render so-called 'top-down' and 'bottom-up' mapping practices in opposition to one another. Both are boundary making practices for configuring worlds. What matters is the effect of their differential articulations of what gets to count––what is included in the frame of an empirical formation. 'Top down' and 'bottom up' mapping practices simply perform different agential cuts, the effects of which do not oppose one another but overlap in the everyday, their interference constituting the entangled viscera of urban bodies as they are rendered differentially intelligible. A perhaps more generative way of relating incommensurable orientations could be to read them through one another. This means recognizing the entanglement of technoscientific and affective orientations to engaging place, producing geographic knowledge, and rendering spatial research public. The wave-particle duality of matter reveals entanglements to be the "poetics of paradox and ambiguity essential to open deep mapping" (Modeen and Biggs 2020, 53). Cacophony is a diffraction pattern marking the interference of  incommensurable intelligibilities. Entanglement is touching is "a cacophony of always already reiteratively intra-acting stories" (Barad 2012, 206-7). Mapping interference is ongoing and open-ended practice of reading/listening/sensing for the effects of difference. 
 </p>
 
-
-  <br>
-
 </div>
 
 <!--thinking with place feeling the city -->
 <div>
-  <a name="" id=""></a> 
+  <a name="distributed-knowing" id="distributed-knowing"></a> 
 <p>
- <span style="font-weight:700">THINKING AND FEELING AS DISTRIBUTED PRACTICES</span><br>
- If sense is the capacity of living beings (Greenhough 2011), then the promiscuous self-touching of physical and virtual subatomic particles and the yearning with which they reach out towards one another (Barad 2012, 2015) can be adduced to illustrate how all matter is vital. "There is a vitality to the liveliness of intra-activity," Writes Barad, "not in the sense of a new form of vitalism, but rather in terms of a new sense of aliveness" (2007, 177). Agency in agential realism is not ascribed based on 'sense,' 'living,' and 'being,' for such properties are themselves constituted through intra-activity and therefore are not inherent to an already individuated part of the word. Writes Barad, "human bodies, like all other bodies, are not entities with inherent boundaries and properties but phenomena that acquire specific boundaries and properties through the open-ended dynamics of intra-activity" (Barad 2007, 172). Barad's posthuman performativity extends Foucault and Butler's analyses on the materialization of bodies by attending how matter itself comes to matter, and to the apparatuses through which human and nonhuman bodies are differentially constituted. Writes Barad, "In an agential realist account, performativity is understood not as iterative citationality (Butler) but as <i>iterative intra-activity</i>" (2007, 184, emphasis in original). fit in this quote: <i>Embodiment is a matter not of being specifically situated in the world, but rather of being of the world in its dynamic specificity</i>" (Barad 2007, 377, emphasis in original). As noted earlier, rendering an intelligible form with determinate properties is a boundary making practice which necessitates exclusions. So, while vitalist geographies regard agency as the capacity to sense (Greenhough 2011), within agential realism's posthuman performativity, "agency is the space of possibilities opened up by the indeterminacies entailed in exclusions" (Barad 2007, 182). 
+ <span style="font-weight:700">THINKING <I>WITH</I> PLACE, <I>FEELING</I> THE CITY</span><br>
+
  </p>
 
  </div>