Subject: Re: silence
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 15:08:45 +0100


I have sympathy for R's predicament - I enjoy his poetry but I haven't
written any lately. Actually where I live I was invited to present some
poetry but as said I haven't been writing - got to think of some good
topics.  Maybe that is a way of breaking the silence - invite contributions
on a particular theme.

Regards

Jurriaan Bendien. 

----------
> From: Cyberdiva <radhik-AT-bgnet.bgsu.edu>
> To: sa-cyborgs-AT-jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU
> Subject: silence
> Date: Tuesday, January 20, 1998 2:21 PM
> 
> 
> 
> very often, I wonder about the silence on this list and why people bother
> to remain subbscribed to a list that doesn't have much exchange... 
> 
> sometimes i think that if i write enough drivel, it will drive
subscribers
> off and i can have a comfy list of one - why not? I'm the only one who
> really posts:).
> 
> 
> sometimes i wonder if my writing shuts up everyone because they're not
> sure *what* the darn stuff is;)
> 
> sometimes i wonder if the lurkers just lurk coz they're too lazy to
figure
> out how to unsub ( if so send me a message and i'll unsub you)
> 
> as for shutting down this space - i wouldn't dream of  it - but we could
> re design it. 
> Now when i say "we" of course i'll be picky about which "we's" ideas i
> incorporate into the actual re-designing of this space (there - right
then
> i shut someone up before they even hit the r key) ....
> but we can talk... visibly - so the archives are witness to my autocracy
> if you like
> 
> I want to hold on to a "feminist" space. I want to hold on to a space
> that encourages awareness of race, gender, class (the trimurtis of ...
> whatever) and critique of privilege, at the same time I don't want it to
> be a pure theoretical discussion list (we have too many of those floating

> around already). I don't want this list to become just another
> "postcolonial" list.
> 
> so how do we do this? suggestions?
> 
> silence....
> :)
> 
> Tell me about this silence...
> what makes a list silent?
> 
> 
> lack of purpose?
> 
> 		purpose under whose definition?
> 
> content?
> 
> 			content validated by who?
> 
> 
> or is it the way we approach the word
> 
> 
> as too sacred to throw about?
> 
> 
> too sacred not
> to rhyme
> 
> as Shakespeare
> did
> 
> too sacred not to prose
> 
> as Bacon did
> 
> too sacred not to
> Theorize and pontificate as
> 
> so many of us academics do
> 
> too often...
> 
> 
> i wonder.....
> 
> we had 109 members a couple days ago - and i can only wonder why we don't
> just have 1...
> 
> 
> i mean there can't be much "backchanneling" going on when no one knows
> who's on the list - except the off-list stuff i recieve in response to
> what i post.
> 
> 
> r
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>