CORE
CO
nnecting
RE
positories
Services
Services overview
Explore all CORE services
Access to raw data
API
Dataset
FastSync
Content discovery
Recommender
Discovery
OAI identifiers
OAI Resolver
Managing content
Dashboard
Bespoke contracts
Consultancy services
Support us
Support us
Membership
Sponsorship
Research partnership
About
About
About us
Our mission
Team
Blog
FAQs
Contact us
Community governance
Governance
Advisory Board
Board of supporters
Research network
Innovations
Our research
Labs
research
The Capaciousness of No: Affective Refusals as Literacy Practices
Authors
Ahmed S.
Burman E.
+33 more
Burnett C.
Clark U.
Dyson A.H.
Field F.
Finnegan R.
Jackson Z.I.
Kinloch V.
Kohl H.
Kuby C.R.
Kulick D.
Ladson‐Billings G.
Massumi B.
McClean C.
McCormack D.P.
Morrell E.
Nirantar
Nxumalo F.
Puar J.K.
Seigworth G.J.
Smith L.T.
Snaza N.
Springgay S.
Springgay S.
Stanley T.J.
Street B.V.
Street B.V.
Thrift N.
Truman S.E.
Truman S.E.
Tuck E.
Tuck E.
Viruru R.
Walkerdine V.
Publication date
24 March 2020
Publisher
'Wiley'
Doi
Abstract
© 2020 The Authors. Reading Research Quarterly published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of International Literacy Association The authors considered the capacious feeling that emerges from saying no to literacy practices, and the affective potential of saying no as a literacy practice. The authors highlight the affective possibilities of saying no to normative understandings of literacy, thinking with a series of vignettes in which children, young people, and teachers refused literacy practices in different ways. The authors use the term capacious to signal possibilities that are as yet unthought: a sense of broadening and opening out through enacting no. The authors examined how attention to affect ruptures humanist logics that inform normative approaches to literacy. Through attention to nonconscious, noncognitive, and transindividual bodily forces and capacities, affect deprivileges the human as the sole agent in an interaction, thus disrupting measurements of who counts as a literate subject and what counts as a literacy event. No is an affective moment. It can signal a pushback, an absence, or a silence. As a theoretical and methodological way of thinking/feeling with literacy, affect proposes problems rather than solutions, countering solution-focused research in which the resistance is to be overcome, co-opted, or solved. Affect operates as a crack or a chink, a tiny ripple, a barely perceivable gesture, that can persist and, in doing so, hold open the possibility for alternative futures
Similar works
Full text
Open in the Core reader
Download PDF
Available Versions
Supporting member
E-space: Manchester Metropolitan University's Research Repository
See this paper in CORE
Go to the repository landing page
Download from data provider
oai:e-space.mmu.ac.uk:624787
Last time updated on 26/03/2020
Sheffield Hallam University Research Archive
See this paper in CORE
Go to the repository landing page
Download from data provider
oai:shura.shu.ac.uk:26092
Last time updated on 06/04/2020
Crossref
See this paper in CORE
Go to the repository landing page
Download from data provider
Last time updated on 08/06/2021
University of Melbourne Institutional Repository
See this paper in CORE
Go to the repository landing page
Download from data provider
oai:jupiter.its.unimelb.edu.au...
Last time updated on 08/12/2020