 Let me introduce our speaker today, Professor Marcos Teninto, who is actually from here, from so far, from the Solaris, actually, I'm not sure. I'm going to introduce the barbers, but she will pass your work in the middle of the place, so she has the PhD from the University of Pennsylvania, and then she worked in this country, she was associated with Burber, and I think she's still in this business, Burber. She was teaching at the University of Hong Kong, in China, and at places. She is well known for her research on learning teaching languages, in particular in the area of pronunciation, and also her work in teaching vocation, applied in universities, especially in phonology, in the area of phonology. And she's also worked on writing, that's what she's going to talk about today, writing, and also in the area of violinism and multi-language. And she has been doing books coming out next year, which I'm going to talk about now. One is with Radlej, and this is about why literature matters, and another book is more about learning the teaching pronunciation. The topic for today is about creative writing, and as you can see, it's called Writing at the Creative Edge. We'll put now in the half. Thank you very much. Yes, planning for approximately one hour talk and then discussion. Thank you very much, I'm very glad to be here. This is a topic which has been exciting me, and specifically I want to be talking about the creative side of scholarly writing, or academic writing. The type of writing we usually think of is non-creative, but I want to show the ways in which it can be quite creative. Writing is actually a very powerful resource for innovation. It allows not only for expression of new ideas, but also for creation of new ideas and new language. By use of the resources of written language, the human being can amass a great deal of information and learning to build a novel construction of knowledge. Some of the greatest human insights would not have been possible without the ability to absorb text and from that to create great new mountains of knowledge as well as new analyses and synthesis of ideas leading to conceptual breakthroughs. Skilled writers use writing as a process to discover new ideas through the thinking process and to create them in words through the languaging process. Writing is a manifestation of the human drive to learn and to explore to discover things through personal experience. This drive to learn and explore is the whole basis for building our brain structure, our intelligence, and as part of that, our language structure. All writers know the thrill of discovery when an idea comes together as something created through the writer's mind and fingertips. It's a two-sided and recursive writing thinking process in which the writing is propelled and fueled by thinking and the act of writing itself of linking one word to the next also keeps the thinking process energized and moving forward. All writing then is first a search or research process to differing degrees external what we would normally think of as research and internal searching through the writer's own store of experiences and the language connected to those experiences and memory. Writing is then the representation of that search or research process on the page or perhaps on the screen. All writing is furthermore an expression of the author's identity, a performance of the self on the page or screen I have set. It's the presentation of the writer's vision, the writer's perception or way of seeing things and the writer's way of saying things. Writing draws on all of the experiences and pieces of language that are stored in the writer's long-term memory banks and mixes and matches these in working memory, often remixing and re-aligning those pieces of memory as new thoughts and language during the writing process. The process of inquiry that leads to new discoveries and understandings energizes the writing process, creating a desire to put those new discoveries and understandings into words, the writer's own unique expression. The process of inquiry is as much a driving force in writing as it is in science. Now, it's well recognized that scholarship is tied to writing as the main mode of reporting and disseminating new ideas. Less well recognized is the extent to which writing is a vehicle for scholarly innovation. In the remainder of this talk, I'm going to seek to demonstrate the extent to which scholarly innovation can be not only reported and disseminated after the fact, but actually brought into being through written means. Much of scholarly innovation is in fact linguistic innovation, linguistic innovation of a type that involves rethinking and extension of existing ideas as well as generation of new ideas. Such linguistic innovation is enabled by and performed through the resources of language, lexico-grammatical and rhetorical, and also psychological tools that are offered in writing. My demonstration of these notions is going to rest largely on a series of analyses at each of these three levels, lexico-grammatical, rhetorical, and psychological, from a passage from Donna Haraway's Cyborg Manifesto. Haraway is a professor of merit of the history of consciousness and feminist studies at the University of California, Santa Cruz. She suggested that new technologies could liberate women by offering them new identities outside of existing gender systems and theory. As Haraway states, the cyborg is a matter of fiction and lived experience that changes what counts as women's experience in the 20th century. This quote and the illustrative passage I discussed are from the revised version of her article first published in 1985 that appeared in her 1991 book Simeons, Cyborgs, and Women, The Re-Invention of Nature. An author presenting a new theory or concept explores and maps out a whole new intellectual territory, creating a carefully contoured linguistic map and textual landscape, what I would like to call a landscape, to reveal their ideas to readers. This textual landscape, made from language, is the new intellectual territory which the writer has claimed as the first to discover it and the first to explore it and map it so that others might come to know it. It is territory that the writer has also conquered and tamed in the sense of resting it from the impassable wiles of the writer's interior to become navigable, inhabitable land shaped and contoured by the writer's mind-breaking labor and foresight in building pathways through the text in just the right places. The writer offers the new territory as a place for further exploration, as a place for a reader to journey with the writer as tour guide. Let's look then at creativity and scholarly writing. Both scholarly and other so-called non-creative writers make use of linguistic techniques which creative writers also apply. Sky Marsden has looked at this and she discovered four main strategies of creativity used both by creative writers and other kinds of writers. I have summarized these in my own words in these categories. Contextual creativity. Associations between different domains through metaphor and analogy used for purposes of clarification, dramatization or highlighting and through the juxtaposition of different registers for purposes of meta-linguistic commentary. Lexicosemantic creativity. Semantic deviations and surprising lexical choice that point up contradictions between a word and its context, thus creating new meanings in addition to neologisms, the creation of new words. Syntactic creativity. Syntactic deviations and unconventional sentence structures and, finally, narrative creativity. Narrativization of agents and actions, that is, the casting of agents and actions in the frame of a story as a way to gain the reader's empathy and emotional investment and also to give abstract concepts a concrete form and agency. So the text that I'm using was first analyzed by Marzen to look at syntactic creativity. I realized that there was much more that could be done with this illustrative text and so I've been analyzing it further. It's a non-fictional scholarly feminist essay which uses the concept of the cyborg, a hybrid of machine and organism to describe contemporary women's experience. Here's the passage. By the late 20th century, our time, a mythic time, we are all chimeras, theorized and fabricated hybrids of machine and organism. In short, we are cyborgs. This cyborg is our ontology. It gives us our politics. The cyborg is a condensed image of both imagination and material reality. The two joint centers structuring any possibility of historical transformation. In the traditions of, quote, Western science and politics, the tradition of racist, male-dominant capitalism, the tradition of progress, the tradition of the appropriation of nature as resource for the productions of culture, the tradition of reproduction of the self from the reflections of the other, the relation between organism and machine has been a border war. Now, Morrison characterizes syntactic deviation and unconventionality in this passage as consisting of a number of features. In particular, the fact that the information is not presented in a conventional structure of main and subordinate clauses, which is characteristic of academic writing. Instead, the author uses the devices of long, one-close sentences of simple structure. They have a lot of phrases to them, but they're only one clause. Repetitive parallelism, a lot of repetition. Multiple semicolons, multiple phrases that carry much of the propositional content. We'll look at this again in a minute. So these are the characteristics that she identified. My own analyses of this text complement these points about the syntactic deviations from the norm and the unconventionality of the text and make a number of additional points about the process of discovering and creating a new construction of ideas in language through writing. So I want to look first at the lexicogrammer. The lexicogrammatical analysis considers the words and the grammatical means the author has selected and how these are put together to create the text. As contrasted with the rhetorical analysis, which I will get to in a few minutes, this is a more micro-level analysis with focus on specific linguistic elements. This form of analysis shows how the author is able to evolve a complex idea by cumulatively building up meaning through nominalization, opposition, and equative clauses representing its key notions and complex abstract content. It's quite an additive text where the author packs most of the propositional content into complex noun phrases and forgoes complex sentence structure with relations of subordination in favor of less tightly constructive additive relations of meaning in a positive, equative clauses and multiple repetitions of the same word or phrase. I think this makes the passage easy to follow. It makes it very reader-friendly, that it can be interpreted and understood bit by bit. It shows how Haraway is a highly reader-oriented writer. She's taking the role of a teacher telling others something that she assumes is related to other things they know, yet will also be new to them and stretch them so that they need preparation and some guidance and hand-holding. So let's look first at an analysis of the verbs and nouns. I've done some color coding here to help you focus. One of the most notable features of this text is that the only verb that occurs in the entire passage, other than one instance of gives, which is in green, is the verb to be underline and in red. All of the other verbs, main verbs, are verb to be. Verbal elements, not functioning as verbs, are italicized. The heavy use of the verb to be is consistent with the definitional purpose of the passage, which is to introduce and begin to explain the author's conception of the human cyborg. The author is bringing a new idea into being, evolving its definitional features as she goes. First, she equates us all to chimeras, and then she hones in on the particular type of chimera we are, which is a cyborg. Now, chimera in Greek mythology is a fire-breathing female monster with a lion's head, a goat's body, and a serpent's tail. But the word has come to signify any mythical animal formed from parts of various animals. It is also used in biology to refer to an organism containing a mixture of genetically different tissues, formed by processes such as fusion of early embryos, grafting, or mutation, or a DNA molecule with sequences derived from two or more different organisms, formed by laboratory manipulation. So it can rightfully be applied as a superordinate term for a cyborg, which is a fictional or hypothetical cybernetic organism, an organism with some mechanical parts, a hybrid of a living creature and a machine. According to Inman, the term cyborg was coined by NASA scientists doing bioengineering experiments with mice in the 1960s to explore the possibility of engineering human body parts to enable astronauts to pursue extended space travel. A cyborg is often considered to be a person whose physical abilities are extended beyond normal human limitations by mechanical elements built into the body. Besides the heavy use of equative constructions with the verb to be, it's also notable that all of the language which is not underlined in this text or the green word, which is almost everything in the passage, falls into the category of noun phrases, meaning that the proportion of nominal to verbal elements is extremely high. This nominalized form of text is suitable in a passage like this one, which is not about actions or events, but is rather about ideas, concepts, and information, as is typical in much academic writing. Highly nominalized grammar is part of its high abstractness, since everyday conversational and transactional language is much more verby, who did what to whom when, reflecting a closer match to the flow of events in time. Unlike descriptions of events or processes where verbs take a leading role in expression of meaning, in this text, as in other academic texts, it is the nouns and their pre- and post-modifiers that do most of the semantic work, including verbal elements functioning as adjectives within the dominant grammatical structure of complex noun phrases. Those are the ones that I've put into a talus. Now, coherence is the property of language that makes clear the underlying ideas of a passage and the relationship of those ideas to one another. In any instance of communication, a language user's intended purpose initiates the communicative process and drives it forward. The forward momentum is maintained as David Brazill noted for spoken language by the process of chaining one element to the next. Brazill's work attempts to capture the dynamic of grammar as a means of achieving communicative purposes. A communicator begins, as he describes it, in an initial state with an intention to communicate something and an idea of how to do so based on a perception of what the audience knows. The communicator, for example, selects a noun subject to begin a sentence, then assembles discourse from that starting move through a succession of modifications of the previous state towards a target state. If the concepts are new or complex, the chaining of one linguistic element to the next may be done in an especially explicit way by introducing concepts and then repeating them in order to continue building on them. Because of the requirements of sequential language, a writer's ideas must be developed one piece at a time. This requires a process of chaining previously unknown that is new or just introduced information to already known previously introduced or given information and of signposting themes and logical relations. Key points can be made salient and so activated in the reader's mind by certain linguistic strategies, such as thematic placement at the beginning of a sentence and also through recycling and repetition, which keeps those points activated in the mind of the reader. Rather than exact repetition, the words may be referred to by pronouns or other forms of informational summation, some of which add some further meaning. The cumulative force of repetition is a linguistic device used by Haraway to gradually build up and link different parts of her idea in a very reader-friendly style of unfolding a quite complex idea so that the reader can follow it in time while mentally processing the text. Some of the repetitive elements are shown on the next slide. So the concept of our time is introduced and then it's expanded by the new notion that the time is mythic. The idea that we are all chimeras is introduced and then revised to a new idea of what we are. In short, we are cyborgs. The now given notion of cyborgs already been introduced is further developed in the equative sentences that follow with the repeated phrase cyborg is as well as it gives us. The new notion of the traditions of quote western science and politics is introduced and then elaborated in a series of phrases which repeat the given noun tradition numerous times to list the traditions the author includes as those of quote western science and politics. So the author is able to put the different parts of the idea in a way which is laid out for the reader in an evolving structure of meaning. Through a syntactic construction that makes heavy use of noun phrases and repetition to help the reader gradually discover both apprehend and comprehend that idea as the author unfolds it in language in words and sentences. The paragraph is building an accumulation of information of connections so that the magnitude of the idea Haraway wants to convey gradually comes into view. So I said before that the complexity of this passage doesn't derive from complex clause structure with subordination but rather from a complex additive buildup of information and the depth of information is in the noun phrases whose structure holds subordinate ideas implicitly rather than explicitly rather than through grammatical means. The packaging of information content in complex noun phrases is characteristic of the technologized and compacted discourse of the modern era especially in academic writing. So let's look at this one more time. There are a number of multiple component noun phrases underlined in this next slide. These incorporate appositives, italicized and in red in the slide so you can see quite a bit of the text is in red. These are linked by commas to an initial noun phrase. The appositives add to or elaborate on the meaning of the initial noun phrase as in the first sentence where the time referred to is stated as by the late 20th century and then the phrases are time and a mythic time expand the initial prepositional phrase. The use of complex noun phrases with appositives is a main strategy which the author uses to build up the meaning of the passage cumulatively step by step by juxtaposition of ideas signaling that she means them to augment the immediately preceding unit. This is a strategy which Haraway has married to repetition as a way of building up the landscape that contains her idea. A positive relation suggests a degree of sameness or equivalence in the meaning of the units though not identity. So using an appositive can build up further meaning. These added noun phrases build a longer and more complex syntactic unit as appositives in construction with the first noun phrase the late 20th century whose meaning they augment and thus further develop. A similar strategy is used to elaborate on the notion of chimeras by attaching in a positive phrase using a comma that gives defining characteristics as theorized and fabricated hybrids of machine and organism. With this background the author is then ready to introduce her key idea which she does in an analogous technique to her use of appositives which is by use of a semicolon with a phrase signifying another way of saying more or less the same thing. In short, we are cyborgs. This cyborg is our ontology, it gives us our politics. The author then picks up the new word cyborg from the previous sentence and elaborates it in an equative sentence with highly complex predicate which continues the loose grammatical construction using appositives expanding on the two elements of the condensed image the noun is attached to saying the cyborg is a condensed image of both imagination and material reality the two joint centers structuring any possibility of historical transformation. The last instance is an especially complex noun phrase constructed as a series of noun phrase appositives attached to an initial noun phrase which is in the traditions of quote western science and politics. The new notion of the traditions of quote western science and politics is introduced at the beginning of the final sentence and then elaborated in a series of phrases which repeat the noun phrase structure as well as the specific noun tradition in the singular to enumerate all the different types of tradition that are included in the introductory plural idea of the traditions of quote western science and politics. We could say that this is a kind of distributed idea the original complex idea is broken into its component parts this is a strategy used by Haraway to distribute the meaning of her idea throughout a sentence in a grammatically simple and transparent chaining structure in this way the different components of the content of the author's idea are laid out for the reader in an evolving semantic construction through a syntactic construction that makes heavy use of a positives and repetition so that the reader can gradually discover the author's idea. This is a way that the reader is able to explore the intellectual territory which the writer has already discovered and explored and then contoured to make it passable for the reader and also inhabitable a mental place where the reader can dwell for a time in contemplation. You can also see in the last sentence the dash which includes an interruptive structure of suspension the build up and delay gives the final point in boldface the delay until the final point which is blue at the very end gives that point a particular poignancy this is because the reader in processing the sentence has to expend mental effort to cumulatively build up an interpretation of the sentence while holding a large amount of information in mind and while suspending the comprehension of the main clause structure so the subject is way back here and then here you finally got the subject-predicate relationship. It's instructive to note that the non-creative lexical choice using the same word tradition over and over again and repetitive phrasal structure of the string of phrases starting with the tradition of is actually a creative linguistic act. This is because the amount of repetition is something unusual and the long string of phrases elaborating the traditions of western science and politics to express quite an original idea. In other words, an aspect of the author's creativity is the unconventional choices made even of ordinary resources such as one particular word and her careful interweaving of creativity and convention. Haraway's lexical choices the words she uses are central to the build up of her idea of the cyborg as a lexical and grammatical construction comprehended in a certain way by a reader. The way in which a person reads and comprehends the words and sentences in a text is described by Farhevan and Perfetti. The reading of text starts with the identification of individual words that is the processes which convert the visual input into a linguistic representation. As a next step, comprehension requires word-to-word word-to-text integration. Understanding sentences requires the identification of words. As a word is identified, the reader connects it to a continuously updated representation of the text. The repeated words and the positives in Haraway's text help to link new information to given information in a transparent way that facilitates the sequential updating of the reader's mental representation or interpretation of the text. Besides the meaning that can be gained directly from the text, much of the meaning of this and other texts is created as it were behind or beyond the text as a process in which the reader interprets the words and larger structure of the text as cues to the specific meaning which the writer intends. Continuing on with the quotation from Farhevan and Perfetti major models of text comprehension have shown that text comprehension cannot be done with only the information present in the text but that individuals also use their prior knowledge to construct new knowledge that is relevant to their individual experiences and situations. They also say the basic meanings are extracted from the sentences progressively built up by reading successive sentences and supplemented by inferences in order to make the text coherent. Scholars like other writers attempt to build comprehensible texts by using certain words and constructions selected to be understood by their readers. In addition, scholars establish their chops that is their credibility or authority and their claim to a reader's attention by showing that they know certain literature and concepts and have a certain politically correct point of view from the perspective of the audiences or fields they're writing for. This has everything to do with the words they select and the larger syntactic constructions they use to express their ideas. Haraway has carefully selected Lexis to establish her authority and claim to the reader's attention. She employs specialized terms from both fantasy and science, chimera and cyborg, as well as a certain formal scholarly way of putting her ideas. She also selects words which have known disciplinary and political associations and implications when she states that nature has been appropriated, that is taken over as a resource, an ecological word, for the productions, a Marxist word, of culture. And she makes reference to the self contrasted with the other that has widespread currency in discussions of identity and alienation. These are scholarly lexical choices leading into whole fields of discourse and academic theory. Haraway establishes her credibility as a social scientist and her scholarly authority through the use of such language in addition to talking about ontology, an important concept from philosophy and the possibility of historical transformation, again with echoes of Marxism. In addition, she uses lexical oppositions conjoined by and that create rich meaning by way of their contrasts, theorized and fabricated hybrids, that is both hypothetical or immaterial and material. Machine and organism, beings that are somehow both mechanical and biological, both imagination and material reality, both mental and physical, intangible and tangible. The final jolt is her positing of a metaphorical border war, a tug of war but in a more modern geographical and political sense between organism and machine. This use of words connoting various themes and discourses is a form of contextual creativity, bringing a number of different fields and domains into her discussion. Writers work within a structure of distinctive yet partially intersecting discourse domains or communities to which they can claim membership through specific credentials and skills or wish to claim membership through modeling their actions on those of people who are already members. They write with knowledge generally in the form of a broadly apprehended mental construct of a specific set of these discourse communities and of their own status, actual as well as desired in relation to those communities. They aim to construct a text that will attract and engage a specific intended audience or audiences from within a certain set of discourse communities. The writer's mental construct of the relevant set can be seen as defining a discourse space comprising the frames of reference which the writer holds in mind while writing for an intended reader. The writer's conception of the relevant discourse space is a product of experience with prior text, that is, of experience as a reader and possibly a past writer of text created within one or more discourse communities. While writing, a writer works within this discourse space both mentally, that is, holding it in mind to define frames of reference, audience, writing goals and textual parameters for achieving these and physically, that is, producing specific kinds of text and assessing whether they meet the requirements of the writer's mental context. Construct, excuse me. Part of the establishment of writer's scholarly chops or authority is by showing that they can write following the conventions of a certain discourse community or set of discourse communities. In social sciences much of the creation of new knowledge is through application of concepts drawn from other fields and applied by metaphorical abstraction. Wignell observes that knowledge making in social science as contrasted with hard science starts from the construction of an abstract model of the world and then proceeds by abstraction and metaphor to connect to the level of technical terminology and explanation. I think it's a pretty good description of what we see in Haraway's work. She uses a number of tropes in the way of lexical and semantic deviation, metaphorical extension of chimera and cyborg. Much of her passage is actually metaphorical applied in using these terms applied to all women and indeed all people, we. She shows contextual creativity in labeling our time for purposes of dramatization and highlighting a mythic time to mean a time of great consequence. In this one paragraph Haraway takes the reader on a journey into a whole new metaphorical and mythical world. The one which she wants to say is not so very far from the one we actually live in at present. Using the word cyborg to apply to all human beings is dramatic in all of the meaning potential through both popular and technical usage and associations that comes with using this word. And it's part of Haraway's creativity that it can be read as a metaphor and also as capturing a more literal or essential sense in which humans and specifically women have the opportunity to become cyborg. Haraway has in effect made it so by stating it to be so. Creating a discourse context in which it is true one in which this new cyborg exists by creating and explaining it she presents her discovery to others and brings them into the process of learning about it and evaluating it. There's a certain shock value in applying the concept of cyborg to everyone who reads the passage with the implication that it applies to all others besides. And Haraway continues to shock the reader with her bold equating of quote Western traditions with much that is wrong with the world. Western and scare quotes is a strategy of highlighting an implicit metalinguistic commentary to show a non-literal meaning that signals irony. The commentary is I don't really mean Western. Through the scare quotes in combination with the long a positive following the dash after the traditions of quote Western science and politics Haraway leads the reader to realize that so-called Western traditions of science and politics are not to be neutrally defined by their geographical origins in the West but are rather to be understood by their characteristics as she asserts them through the use of the dash to link them directly to a lot of negative phenomena racism, male dominant capitalism progress which as an item in this obviously negative list must be intended to mean something like so-called progress and note also the irony inherent in speaking of the tradition of progress almost a contradiction in terms you might say. The appropriation of nature as a resource for the productions of culture and the reproduction of the self from the reflections of all these negatives. Now Haraway has made some reflections on her own writing in response to communication I've had with her about my analyses of it. I propose to her that her writing style was like knitting ideas together but she felt that a knit structure was too tight to be a good analog to her writing. She said that a crocheted one is better in the way she builds her text to be loosely connected and to continue growing as she told me, quote, the hyperbolic spaces of crocheting meaning spaces that are repetitive but also irregular in some ways with the spaces in them continuing to grow as you perform the crocheting are perhaps better analogs than knitting for the kinds of writing that I love and try to practice, end quote. Haraway also made it clear to me that she sees thinking, writing and all language use as a materially anchored type of practice in her words, quote, thinking is in the sensuous practices of writing, speaking, making meanings in signifying flesh. I do not experience ideas or concepts to precede an essay. They take flesh in the sentences. She referred me to Margaret and Christine Wirtheim's Crochet Coral Reef Project which has a website and a book for which Haraway has written the preface. The project involves making crochet models of coral reefs as a way to raise awareness of ecological damage to the reefs and to the oceans. The image I put on the opening slide was one of a jellyfish crocheted by Vonda McIntyre who's a writer of feminist science fiction and other fiction and very involved in this project. The crocheted reef is pretty amazing looking, it seems to me. And each item is also a model of a certain type of geometric figure, hyperbolic figures, which mathematicians previously thought could not be modeled as real objects but which are apparently well modeled by the floppy constructions made from crocheting. The next slide here is one of Margaret Wirtheim's crocheted coral reefs which is in a museum in Germany. And one of the other coral reef designs is in the Smithsonian Museum in Washington, D.C. So this gives you an idea of the creative network that Haraway is part of. To finish up the lexico-grammatical, which is the larger part of this talk, I would like to say that the totality of the lexico-grammatical devices which the author employs make it possible for her to build the great mounds of meaning embodied in this text, which she would say is contoured and crocheted loop by loop, or perhaps in my landscape metaphor built up stone by stone. The author creates her landscape by linking given and new information in a way that provides readers with handholds of what has already been said, and this allows them to gradually work their way up the meaning construction to the peak of her idea. Repeated words offer some of those handholds for latching on to what the author is up to. And then each new piece of information allows a slow and steady climb to reach the pinnacle of meaning at top or the end of the entire linguistic structure. The frequent occurrences of the verb to be also offer the reader familiar handholds, resting points, and points of focus. And the use of simple and positive relations and otherwise relatively simple sentence structure scaffolds the climb. Now I'd like to turn to the rhetorical analysis which shows how the lexico-grammar works to achieve the larger structure and purposes of the text. This is a more macro level of analysis building from the micro level of lexico-grammar to examine the communicative function of the text. This form of analysis demonstrates how the author interweaves purposes of definition, argumentation, and persuasion in the creation of a significant new idea tied to other ideas within a specific scholarly billiard. The four classical divisions of rhetoric are narration, description, exposition, and argumentation. In this one paragraph, Haraway uses them all. She employs narration to initiate a story frame within which the cyborg is both historicized and mythologized. She employs description to characterize the cyborg as a kind of chimera and then as a theorized and fabricated hybrid of machine and organism. She employs exposition to further elaborate on the concepts related to the cyborg stating that it is our ontology, it gives us our politics, it's a condensed image of both imagination and material reality, et cetera. And she employs argumentation though in a relatively indirectly or subtly argumentative way in making bold pronouncements and in equating and linking various concepts and constructs grammatically to persuade the reader to agree with her point of view of the present and past reality of change going forward. The passage is definitely an argument in several senses. First, it challenges the current received wisdom or ideology. Second, it tries to get the reader to buy into the new construct of the cyborg and its relation to feminist issues. In general, it tries to convince the reader of the author's point of view and in that sense also is an argument. She uses the inclusive way to draw readers into her perspective and then to lead them to that whole very long final sentence which is an argument set by placing western and scare quotes and thereby raising issues with all of western science and politics. She's also gaining the reader's assent by setting up a story structure and pulling in the reader with some key devices such as the scene setting initial phrase by the 20th century and the framing of our time as a mythic time. By setting up the passage in this way as a narrative of mythic proportions Haraway encourages the reader to think big and also to suspend some degree of purely logical or rational thinking and move into an alternate, more open and imaginative story world in which she can construct a new concept. She also seeks to engage the reader through building a compelling story that the reader will buy into and thereby agree to do the work of comprehending her idea and also agreeing to its different components or at least being open to them as a thought provoking hypothetical or possible world. This is a form of narrative creativity in the casting of what is essentially a scholarly argument in a story frame set in a specific time and also a mythic time casting the cyborg as a character that has entered the human story and become us. In this way, Haraway has made the cyborg relatable and has stimulated reader's story schema thereby engaging anticipatory schemas for interpretation and increasing their investment in the reading comprehension process. The author has created a discourse context which pulls the reader into her world both the imaginary intellectual world of this written text and the world behind that world which is that of the author's highly imaginative and highly intellectual mind and the intellectual milieu of her disciplines of feminist studies and history of consciousness. A number of people have stressed the value of story for persuasion. Brian Boyd, for example, his magnificent book on the origin of stories from a few years ago and also the psychologist Jerome Bruner who said that both argumentation and narrative can be equally effective and convincing. The first by attempting to establish the truth of the case and the second by attempting to establish its life likeness. If we look at Aristotelian rhetoric we can say that argumentation focuses on attracting the audience by building new knowledge and establishing the author's authority through logos while telling the telling of a story focuses on building the audience's connection to the author and establishing a sense of familiarity through pathos. The type of ethos established in the two cases I think is different. In the first case it focuses on the author's credibility through expertise. Think Hillary Clinton. While in the second case it focuses on the author's credibility through common humanity and relatability. Think Donald Trump or Sarah Palin. Haraway is able to establish both of these types of ethos in her skillful applications like logos and pathos. Sorry I had to get in a little political point. Constructing a narrative counters the scholarly tradition of the objective or the scientific academic essay built on a hierarchical, logical or argumentative structure. By invoking a story frame the author involves the reader in the meaning making of evolving her idea and sets up a different kind of text from the usual academic essay. Rather than the objective essay attempting to eliminate any traces of the author which it is argued by Olivia Archibald was the original impetus for the scholarly essay from Francis Bacon contrasted with some other people writing at the same time. So trying to remove the human author rather than doing that she sets up a close involvement in the interaction with the reader. Haraway has set up a dialogic text in Bakhtan's sense what Hermans and Kepin describe as an idea or a thought endowed with a voice and expressed as emanating from a personal position in relation to others. In using all of these different strategies narration, description, exposition and argumentation Haraway writes trans generically between literary and scholarly domains and styles. She invokes the conventions of so many different forms and purposes of writing even while breaking these if the genres are viewed individually. She thus uses the resources of genre in an especially creative way meshing genres to create her own unique hybrid kind of persuasive writing. And finally I want to say something about psychological analysis. This shows how the lexical grammatical and rhetorical features of the text create a psychological by that I mean both a cognitive and an effective interface between the writer and the reader. As contrasted with the other analyses this mode attempts to look at the text not as an extracted artifact but as an activity of creation. I've already talked about the nature of the writer-reader relationship that Haraway has set up in her text through her lexical grammatical choices and her rhetorical strategies. This can be seen as an aspect of the psychology of her text because reading is a search for meaning that is also a social psychological process in which a reader becomes engaged with the text and so with the author of a text at a psychological level involving emotions and intellect and at a social level involving a sense of connection or disconnection to the author and what the person has written about. But I want to talk about another kind of psychological analysis. This involves trying to understand the mind and behavior of the creative individual. This has been explored for the past 20 years or so by Sternberg. He maintains that creativity requires a confluence of six distinct but interrelated resources, intellectual abilities, knowledge, styles of thinking, personality, motivation and environment. These are summarized in this next slide based on Sternberg's 2006 overview. I will leave this slide up for a moment but I'm not going to spend time on it now. These notions of creativity are central to what he calls the investment theory of creativity which was developed by Sternberg and his colleague Lu Bart some 20 years ago. As Sternberg describes it from the investment view the creative person buys low by presenting an idea that initially is not valued and then attempting to convince other people of its value which I think is a good way to describe what Haraway's been trying to do with this cyborg idea. After convincing other people that the idea is valuable which increases the perceived value of the investment the idea becomes more valuable the creative person sells high by leaving the idea to others moving on to another idea. People typically want others to love their ideas but immediate universal applause for an idea often indicates that it's not particularly creative. Innovators in the world of ideas have the ability to recognize potentially important ideas. I'm going to call these pre-memes and to make them memes through skilled thinking processes which following Rodney Jones are conveniently described as the three M's of meaning modding and mashing. This is an article by my former colleague and boss actually in Hong Kong Rodney Jones who is now at Renning and he had a I think rather brilliant idea of using these concepts from the internet and creating mashing is locating relevant source materials and combining them in effective and appropriate ways. Modding is modifying altering or building upon the ideas that have been borrowed from others to create some kind of new idea or perspective and memeing presenting the new idea or perspective in a way that makes it memorable, relevant, useful and or emotionally compelling creators. So he's analogized from online digital practices and he's talking about scholarly writing as describable as remixed text making use of the ideas of others combined with the author's fresh perspective to create a new text. His three components can be viewed as central processes in the creation of both new texts and new ideas involving the creators of decision processes and linguistic processes. Of course, deliberate actions are required to carry out the necessary activities of memeing modding and mashing and the creation of an innovative idea that has meme power also requires the six resources referred to by Sternberg. In other words, the three M's required deliberate decision time and effort, knowledge and linguistic skill. Moreover, being an innovator especially in the world of ideas requires a decision to be so that is dependent on a sort of courage and drive to originality. And Sternberg says here in particular, buying low and selling high typically means defying the crowd so that one has to be willing to stand up to conventions if one wants to think and act in creative ways. Often creative people seek opposition that is, they decide to think in ways that counter veil how others think. This is certainly true of Haraway as illustrated in her text and also in general of her disciplinary home of feminist studies which pushed against the status quo. Sternberg goes on to observe that creative ideas are both acceptable but are often rejected when the creative innovator stands up to vested interest and defies the crowd. Society often perceives opposition to the status quo as annoying, offensive and reason enough to ignore innovative ideas. And I think we can say that some people find Haraway's ideas and even much if not all of the content of feminist studies, annoying and offensive. It doesn't matter for the points that I'm making, I'm simply trying to show her innovative and creative process. A final point from Sternberg is what he calls the propulsion theory of creative contribution. The basic idea is that creativity can be of different kinds depending on how it propels existing ideas forward, ranging from minor replications to major redirections in thinking. A creative contribution, he says, represents an attempt to propel a field to wherever the creator believes the field should go. So creativity is, by its nature, propulsion. It moves a field from some point to another. It also always represents a decision to exercise leadership to try to move other people to that new creative space. These are the different kinds of contributions according to the propulsion theory. Paradigm preserving, paradigm rejecting, or paradigm synthesizing. In expanding feminist discourse to include the techno idea of the cyborg, Heridae has propelled the field in a way that goes beyond what Sternberg describes as forward incrementation. Even advanced forward incrementation to a redirection perhaps of the re-initiating kind that is with a new starting point related to technology. In this she shows herself to be what Dweck called an incremental theorist that is one who seeks out a new conceptual domain in which to work and expand her ideas. I would classify Heridae as what John Lovell calls a visionary creative. Visionary creatives like Einstein and Dolly respond to the culture of their day and at the same time they advance it into an emerging world creating for us an entirely new stage on which we live our lives. This stage presents us with the nature of our cosmos and our place in it our newly formed circumstances the possibilities of our relationships and the means by which we might fulfill our potentials. This quotation applies quite directly by Heridae and more generally to the whole concept of the cyborg as applied within feminist studies. Edmund has talked about this saying that since the time when the cyborg was coined it has been employed as a social, political and cultural technology for reform. In Heridae's manifesto for cyborgs for instance she reclaims the cyborg from the overly masculinist military industrial complex and replaces it and reshapes it sorry into a basis for feminist agency. Heridae reminds us that connections are critical whether between individuals technologies, societies or cultures and helps us understand the complex and dynamic interactions among individuals technologies and the context they share. Note Heridae's reclaiming and redefinition of the cyborg in a new context an extension of previous usage but at the same time a redefinition that focuses on some new properties especially the cyborg's agency and activism. In the words of Edmund as Heridae and other scholars have shown the cyborg is an agent for change never a pacified or go-along figure in any context. Lovebell goes on to elaborate his conception as shown on the slide the second part of that slide visionary creatives swim in the culture of their day and manifest in their work the spirit of their age the things they create in art design, science, technology business embody that spirit and at the same time or a little off-center for us somehow not what we anticipated thus pulling us into the future. So this concept of the cyborg by Heridae is a social construct a metaphorical hybrid of human and machine representing a range of different possible forms of humaneness that challenge the border between organism and machine defining the possibilities for historical transformation. It's a new entity the new human or imagined cyborg is not bound by these old categories of so called western science and politics it's not racist it's not male dominated it's not capitalist it doesn't believe in the traditional view of progress as appropriating nature for the productions of human culture nor in the limiting definitions of the self in relation to comparison or contrast with the other. In these words her manifesto taps into themes of egalitarianism and social equality feminism environmentalism and agentive identity. It looks forward to a whole range of definitions of possible humaneness. The cyborg concept defined by Heridae was recognized to be a threshold concept the term used by Meyer and Land to describe a newly apprehended idea that opens a new way of thinking about something. The cyborg notion as she proposed it and as subsequently developed is also definitely a meme. In conclusion I've shown how Heridae using various forms of creativity was able to bring her insight about our late 20th century into being. That is to discover it conceptually and create it semantically and syntactically in words. It also shows how through these uses of language she was able to bring her discovery of this insight to others in a way that helped them understand it and see it as she does. So both the writer and the reader of the text participate in discovery of meaning and ideas. The author's degree of creative discovery oriented expression through skilled use of language is an essential part of the process of this new idea being born and taking shape. Heridae may have had some idea of the cyborg before writing about it but the detail of the idea is embodied in the syntactic, semantic, rhetorical and psychological construction which she built in the specific words selected and the sentences made from these. It can therefore be said that while the conceptual foundation of the idea may be independent of language the details of its construction are built through language and as often as not the actual idea for a text doesn't even exist prior to writing about it. This is because the building of the conceptual structure of an idea is facilitated by the building of the linguistic structure. Many ideas do not exist until they're constructed linguistically because semantic structure bridges between conceptual and syntactic structure. Ideas and language are to a greater or lesser extent co-constructed through the writing process so that the creativity and discovery of the idea is bound up with its creative and discovery oriented expression in words. This is a two way street. It's a two way street in one other sense as well. Because of its realization and language in words this is a creation and discovery process in which not just the writer but also others who read the author's words participate. The language in which this insight about cyborgs is written requires active participation by a reader to unpack and comprehend all of the different aspects of the meaning. The way the passage is written using a narrative structure at the beginning introducing new ideas dramatically through surprising use of words connecting to other known areas of content and building meaning cumulatively through opposition, repetition and linkage of given and new information. All this draws the reader into an interpretational process of re-experiencing the writer's own creation and discovery process of her original idea and the language in which that idea in all its complexity could be expressed. When an author writes on this level the reader can experience some of the thrill which the author must have experienced in first discovering and creating this idea and expressing it precisely as intended. Thank you very much. Take a breath and say something. Yes. How much of this creativity do you think is learned creativity and how like I guess this is really just your feelings about the genre of like baby and the e-work and how much of this do you think is actively charged to doing these thoughts and not being aware of it? Very little. It's one of the reasons I got interested in if you want to come up and see me afterwards I have one paper that came out in the journal Writing in Pedagogy talking about how to increase interaction with between reader and writer and I have an article in an edited collection talking about how to get students to think more creatively in their writing and using actually this example. So I think it's rarely taught. It's kind of an after-thought you might give ten percent points for creativity or something in writing but it's rarely taught as the initiating point for writing so I think we're teaching writing very incorrectly. A very structural approach that makes it dry and not authentic. I think that to the first part of what you were asking it has something to do with the person. The personality the drive to be creative. There definitely are different levels of drive and different attachments of personality to being creative. This person Donna Haraway is really trying to be very creative. She's trying to write in a sort of literary creative way and not to write in the older traditional way but not everybody of course does but you find high creativity also in hard science sometimes. If you look at articles in nature and science some of the ones that get the most attention and which are used again and again in mashing up other people's work are the ones where something very creative has been said. New concepts like the double helix for example. That's quite creative. So I think for very important scholarly work it's not that uncommon. It's difficult. I read one of those actually one time for film studies PHD that was really on the edge just like my title on the edge of creativity. Hard to read because it was so on the edge but it was quite brilliant and eventually the person did pass but they did have some criticism for publication would have to reign it back in a bit more. So it's difficult you have to operate within the bounds of a certain discipline the bounds of the structure of the type of writing that you're doing not always easy and sometimes it takes a while for a field to catch up to the creative person and accept what they're doing not everybody. Well it's this idea of pre-meme is they're able to find something in the context of culture that hasn't quite been apprehended yet and hasn't been developed yet and to pull people towards it. Haraway took the idea of cyborg which had been around for a while but she did something really different with it and that was quite unusual and highly creative act so they do swim in the culture of their day but they kind of swim against the tide they swim the hard way so I don't think that's an incorrect thing to say and I think what lobal means by it is that they are very immersed in large structures of culture these are probably people who read in a lot of different areas they're involved in a lot of different kinds of activities. Haraway seems to know a lot about science she knows a lot about art she certainly knows philosophy and social science in general so maybe these are trans-disciplinary types maybe that's crucial for it if you're too narrowly in one discipline then where will you pull those pre-means from? where are you going to find those new ideas that you can somehow apply in your context from some other context where will those analogies and metaphors come from it seems that a lot of development of language is from metaphors it's from seeing new connections and that seems to be true of creativity in general so if you're very narrowly constrained I don't know I had a colleague some years ago who published a ton in a certain part of the field in linguistics it's a great deal and every time I read one of his articles I thought if only you had written a little more discussion but he knew exactly how much he had to publish just to get it to the point where he would get accepted by a good journal and he never did the very creative thing that I always thought was possible that there was a lot there that was left unanalyzed and unexplored so going back to what you said at the beginning exactly and he published three articles instead of one for example so it's a tricky business it's a tricky business that's a good way of putting it I think it's very important that we advise students well on this to do a whole master's thesis or a whole PHG that has nothing of the self in it is a shame to do it like pulling teeth something that's not enjoyable and there's no thrill to I finally thought of a wonderful way to say this and I got a new idea through my research and not having that sense of shame why are they going through education then higher education so they get that they get the ma in the fud the degree in other words but I think it's a shame so can I ask you another question I'm kind of curious if you give me an idea of the textuality in the discussion well I was trying to stick to that one passage and do you think that it should be mentioned in connection with this one passage this specific passage oh okay with the crochet yes and maybe even hyper media there the depth like boxes like Chinese boxes or something like that that's a good idea which you well the original article or the original concept was developed in 1985 that was very prescient wasn't it and further developed in the 1990s and published a few different places in the 1990s and it's been picked up just very much in the field of feminist studies so it's very well known within that field now and considered a seminal foundational concept oh of course the Borg I didn't even think to talk about that yes the whole idea of the side work is a popular one in many different aspects of our culture but she she picked up on it in an early time and did something unusual with it in an early time probably had something to do with her massive reading that she was very massively knowledgeable in many different fields it's typical by the way of people at her university the different UC campuses have somewhat different characters and Santa Cruz tends to have highly creative somewhat fringe types and I don't mean that in a negative way I guess it sounds like it using the word French I don't mean it that way cutting edge types put it that way yes the surfer dudes it's a beautiful place but all of the campuses have that I was at Santa Barbara for a while also right next to the ocean the state of California a wonderful real estate I think we're exhausted thank you for the interesting questions and discussion as well and the chance to put these ideas out there