Directed and elliptic flows of neutrons and light charged particles were measured for the reaction 197 Au+ 197 Au at 400 MeV/nucleon incident energy within the ASY-EOS experimental campaign at the GSI laboratory. The detection system consisted of the Large Area Neutron Detector LAND, combined with parts of the CHIMERA multidetector, of the ALADIN Time-of-flight Wall, and of the Washington-University Microball detector. The latter three arrays were used for the event characterization and reaction-plane reconstruction. In addition, an array of triple telescopes, KRATTA, 2 was used for complementary measurements of the isotopic composition and flows of light charged particles.From the comparison of the elliptic flow ratio of neutrons with respect to charged particles with UrQMD predictions, a value γ = 0.72 ± 0.19 is obtained for the power-law coefficient describing the density dependence of the potential part in the parametrization of the symmetry energy. It represents a new and more stringent constraint for the regime of supra-saturation density and confirms, with a considerably smaller uncertainty, the moderately soft to linear density dependence deduced from the earlier FOPI-LAND data. The densities probed are shown to reach beyond twice saturation.

Reflexivity involves turning one’s reflexive gaze on discourse—turning language back on itself to see the work it does in constituting the world. The subject/researcher sees simultaneously the object of her or his gaze and the means by which the object (which may include oneself as subject) is being constituted. The consciousness of self that reflexive writing sometimes entails may be seen to slip inadvertently into constituting the very (real) self that seems to contradict a focus on the constitutive power of discourse. This article explores this site of slippage and of ambivalence. In a collective biography on the topic of reflexivity, the authors tell and write stories about reflexivity and in a doubled reflexive arc, examine themselves at work during the workshop. Examining their own memories and reflexive practices, they explore this place of slippage and provide theoretical and practical insight into “what is going on” in reflexive research and writing.

In this article, we describe a collective biography that we convened in order to revisit the site of the radical theoretical break with the liberal humanist individual marked by the poststructuralist work of Henriques and colleagues and the feminist poststructuralist work of Weedon. These writers suggest that the new subject of poststructuralist theory will be more open to the changes desired by feminist and social justice movements. They describe the break with the liberal humanist subject as a break that heralds new possibilities of personal and cultural transformation. In this article, using the medium of collective biography stories, we revisit the relation between the liberal humanist individual and the transformative possibilities poststructuralist writers envisaged for the new subject of poststructuralism. We situate the discussion in the context of our transformation into neoliberal subjects over the last three decades.

No abstract

Poststructural theories problematize taken-for-granted humanist notions of the subject as capable of self-knowledge and self-articulation while simultaneously providing a rationale for incorporating the personal into research. The body, emotions, and lived experience become texts to be written and read in autoethnography. However, a paradox arises for poststructural autoethnography in that autoethnographic research presumes that subjects can speak for themselves, whereas poststructuralism disrupts this presumption and stresses the (im)possibilities of writing the self. This article explores the work of pivotal French poststructuralists—Foucault, Barthes, Derrida, and Cixous—as they write themselves and put those selves under erasure in writing. The author identifies the implications for a reconfigured poststructural autoethnography, tracing textual strategies that evoke fractured, fragmented subjectivities and provoke discontinuity, displacement, and estrangement. In poststructural autoethnography, the writing writes the writer as a complex (im)possible subject in a world where (self) knowledge can only ever be tentative, contingent, and situated.