After the earthquake I made it back to Canberra.
On my return flight I was able to read the following paper:
Manfredini & Ta (2016) Co-Creative Urbanism: The production of plural evolutionary spatialities throuhg conflicts and complicities between public and private in the streets of Hanoi, Vietnam.
Rehearsal of the ppt- presentation for the 17th November.
Attended the Research Bites Seminar on Cross Culture Studies (notes as followed):
also known as comparable studies
Testing in different cultures if a concept is right
Lead questions in my head:
Is play culturally grounded?
What is culture?
Determine how fine grain someone wants to get (with regards to play culture in each of the units)
Individuals should construct the notion of play? Literature –> perhaps include in unstructured interview as a last question to sum up!
Hofsted –> research into business culture on the broad scale
identified four categories:
- Power distance
- Individualism and collectivism
- Uncertainty avoidance (risk management)
- Masculinity and feminity of different cultures
- Acknowledging the limitations
- Reflexivity and note taking –> on my own thoughts and worries –> snapshots of my perception.
- issue with survey (huge data sets)
- A definition is the end result of a battle. In relation to play we are in the middle of a battle field.
Question in relation to arrogance and history of western research (dictated doctrine globally with the nobel price as the ultimate goal). However, knowledge in non written form just as important –> indigenous lived culture for example
Plato originally implied limitations to research already in the process of writing things down. There is something pure lost while doing so.
My thought: also they were informed by their history and political circumstances at the time. Therefore it reinforces the spiral approach to knowledge with windows of opportunities to evolve and preserve aspects that can advance societies. However, by doing so through written language we are loosing some of the essence.