August 8, 2017 at 4:01 pm
Grace – your points about epistemology and methods and experiential learning are very important – if there is a way to unpack and elaborate through out at key points (I have a couple comments and others have suggestions too) – this would be very useful to decolonizing methods and your points will be clearer .
See in context
August 8, 2017 at 7:45 am
There is so much in this talk that is rich and illuminating and very deeply important right now. I’ve made some slight comments on paragraphs 1-12. I think paragraphs 13-end need the most attention because that’s where you need to bring various strands together to deliver on the promise of your title. Maybe as I point out around paragraph 12 you could focus on your reading of The Dispossessed and then incorporate your additional ideas about practice/theory and what you suggest is the practice of imagination in the remainder of the paper, with more of a conclusion at the end?
August 8, 2017 at 7:38 am
Can you provide a transition between paragraph 12 and 13 maybe using the kind of Indigenous-anarcho thinking that’s embedded in paragraph 12 to do that?
August 8, 2017 at 7:34 am
Maybe describe the community in which you grew up before moving on to a discussion of The Dispossessed. Would be organizationally helpful to pick up on the connections between community and the novel in a paragraph devoted to doing just that.
August 7, 2017 at 1:50 pm
Is there anything more in the transcription that might clarify the link between meeting her husband and her recognition of experience-based knowledge in Le Guin’s thinking and writing?
August 7, 2017 at 1:42 pm
I think there are some thought-provoking things going on in this piece. But the piece itself is not yet a clearly defined work. Is it a narrative of the panel? Is it an exploration of imaginactivism through the lens of the panelists’ discussion points? Is it both a discussion of imaginactivism using the method of imaginactivism (the billiards example or the hands brushing against each other visual)? I think the first three paragraphs need to be re-worked so that readers know what this piece is and can identify its argument. The conclusion also needs to be reworked so that readers will be able to understand your contribution.
August 7, 2017 at 1:33 pm
I agree with the above comment. The concern about exclusions is good, though. The other text could be listed explicitly as an example of a possible exclusion.
August 7, 2017 at 1:31 pm
The final line is a quote. Would you add citation information, such as a page number?
August 7, 2017 at 1:29 pm
The choice to italicize the final line of this email is confusing to me. Do you mean to emphasize the question?
August 7, 2017 at 11:51 am
I want to echo some of the above comments related to organization of argument. I noticed in this paragraph, you take a good amount of time to discuss your research focus and even new book projects. While these sound fascinating, I don’t understand how they relate to the overall argument. You start with a description of a panel, then discuss the term imaginativism, and then get into your research focus and next book. I suggest reworking your intro so that it sets up an argument to explore all of these as ways to discuss imaginactivism.
Website content © Ada Journal Review 2017. All rights reserved.