2021
DOI: 10.52086/001c.29497
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Fictocritical improv for a new author paradigm, or How to render the messiness of string figure research

Abstract: This paper explores the complexity of collaborative authorship in the humanities, proposing the string figure as a dexterous model with which to map connections amongst a broad network of contributors. Drawing on the recent work of Donna Haraway, in addition to post-structuralist thinkers like Roland Barthes, Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, string figures (eg cat’s cradle) are rendered as adequately supple and striated to the diagramming of creative synergy. To this end the authors deploy fictocritical and … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

1
0

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 5 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…More recently, the string figure has also returned to humanities discourses. Initiated by Donna Haraway’s (2016) rich theoretical engagement in her book Staying with the Trouble: Making Kin in the Chthulucene , in addition to a preceding shorter text ( Haraway, 1994 ), there has been a burst of interest in the topic, which has now been probed from feminist, Indigenous, and discourse-analytical lenses ( Bell, 2010 ; De Line, 2018 ; Eastop, 2007 ; Egeland, 2004 ; Probert, 2004 ; Tolbert and Bazzul, 2020 ; Svec and Pearl, 2021 ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…More recently, the string figure has also returned to humanities discourses. Initiated by Donna Haraway’s (2016) rich theoretical engagement in her book Staying with the Trouble: Making Kin in the Chthulucene , in addition to a preceding shorter text ( Haraway, 1994 ), there has been a burst of interest in the topic, which has now been probed from feminist, Indigenous, and discourse-analytical lenses ( Bell, 2010 ; De Line, 2018 ; Eastop, 2007 ; Egeland, 2004 ; Probert, 2004 ; Tolbert and Bazzul, 2020 ; Svec and Pearl, 2021 ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%