AO. Kaplan and Cronan - discursive risk.

AO: This example of collaboration would fit under what Matsutake Group called intimate co-authorship (on the opposite spectrum of “Big Science”). They spend the essay reflecting on the nature of their collaboration and note at the end that the endeavor has shown them “some of what had been carefully, though unintentionally, kept unspoken when we began has now been said.” (557), in other words, making the implicit explicit. Their nano analysis is strongest as they reflect on what makes their collaboration work so well (their shared political and intellectual commitements). They see collaboration as solidarity and agreement. Theirs is the only piece I’ve seen that touches on sexuality as part of their analysis. But they avoid the mention of race. They pay attention and document their bodily practices to collaborative co-author works together but do not discuss “data” explicitly. Given their disciplines (English), they do not conduct fieldwork together.


Analytic (Question)





Creative Commons Licence