Artículos de revistas sobre el tema "Timothy Leary"

This paper explores the rise and fall of Cyberpunk influences in California’s Silicon Valley and San Francisco Bay area circa 1988–93, in prevalent technologies, industry, by artists and in enthusiastic magazines thriving there. Attentive to the Cyberpunk novelists, an animating spirituality of the time also looks to Timothy Leary and Marshall McLuhan.

In 1964, Timothy Leary and a few colleagues published The Psychedelic Experience, a manual for “tripping” explicitly based on The Tibetan Book of the Dead. At the core of the Tibetan materials lies the concept of the bardo, the “in between” realm of the afterlife. While acknowledging the problematic nature of Leary’s radical appropriation, this essay argues that his application of these materials to the orchestration and regulation of psychedelic experience reflected a productive reframing of the phantasmagoria common to strong psychedelic experience. Using tools of comparative religion and secular psychology, Leary constructed a model of psychological transformation that rejected religious or transcendental meaning while creatively expanding the bardo concept already evident in Tibetan Buddhism.

“Expansão” e “extensão” foram duas palavras-chave no momento da contracultura estadunidense. Com base em dois autores do período, de diferentes áreas, Timothy Leary e Marshall McLuhan, a proposta do presente artigo é mostrar como tais noções foram trabalhadas, direta ou indiretamente, em diferentes áreas do pensamento. Tendo como horizonte a veloz difusão da internet e, em seu bojo, das novas alternativas de mídia, procurou-se identificar como os autores citados as vislumbraram, para, a seguir, delinear o momento em que produziram suas reflexões. Por fim, alvitrou-se mostrar em que medida e sob quais faces essas ideias e vislumbres se manifestariam no mundo contemporâneo

This paper describes a radical and short-lived spiritual movement that emerged in New York State in the 1960s. With Dr. Timothy Leary as the figurehead, two of these psychedelic religions rose to brief cultural prominence in period of 1963––1968 when Leary and his communal group made their home in the small village of Millbrook, New York. Due to negative media attention and a subsequent law enforcement crackdown brought upon at least partially by the increasingly provocative stance of the leaders of these psychedelic groups, they were forced to flee the state by early 1968. This paper establishes the historical significance of New York State's Acid Churches within the culture of the 1960s and draws the link to today's Neopagan and New Age movements and the rebirth of the use of psychedelic substances within the modern scientific, psychological, and therapeutic communities.

Zaburzenia psychiczne stają się plagą współczesnych społeczeństw postindustrialnych, poddanych oddziaływaniu szybko ewoluującego otoczenia cywilizacyjnego. W połowieubiegłego wieku odkrycie potencjału LSD i psylocybiny znalazło zastosowanie na gruncie psychologii, a wśród prekursorów jego wykorzystania w psychoterapii był pracownik Uniwersytetu Harvarda, twórca interpersonalnej teorii osobowości, doktor Timothy Leary. Leary przyznawał im istotną rolę w ewolucji gatunku ludzkiego i leczeniu zaburzeń psychicznych, co potwierdził w eksperymentach penitencjarnych, redukując znacząco skłonności przestępcze osadzonych. Kluczem do uzyskania pozytywnych efektów okazało się być intensywne doświadczenie mistyczne i wglądy dotyczące natury rzeczywistości. Substancje psychedeliczne określa się mianem enteogenów (wywołujących doświadczenie boskości) i jako takie wyłącza ze zbioru substancji narkotycznych. Funkcjonują one w społecznościach preindustrialnych, stanowiąc narzędzie tradycyjnych uzdrowicieli. Eksperymenty z psychedelikami były również prowadzone przez czeskiego psychologa Stanislava Grofa, twórcę teorii matryc perinatalnych, stosującego LSD w terapii nerwic, uzależnień i redukcji lęku u pacjentów chorych na raka. W latach 90. Rick Strassman wykorzystywał najpotężniejszy istniejący psychedelik, DMT, wytwarzany także przez szyszynkę. Wszystkie te sesje dowodzą transformującej natury doświadczeniapsychedelicznego i wyznaczają przyszłe kierunki badań w kontekście autyzmu, schizofrenii, psychopatii i tanatologii.

Abstract The writer Robert Anton Wilson (1932–2007) played a significant intellectual role in the American counterculture in the late 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s. Drawing from a wide range of discourses, as well as his own occultural fictions and personal experiments in “hedonic engineering,” Wilson presented a pluralistic view of reality that combined a pragmatic skepticism with a creative and esoteric embrace of the “meta-programming” possibilities of altered states of consciousness. In his 1975 Illuminatus! trilogy, written with Robert Shea, Wilson wove anarchist, psychedelic, and occult themes into a prophetic conspiracy fiction written with a satiric and willfully pulp sensibility. Ritually experimenting with psychedelic drugs and sexual magic – experiences related in his 1977 book Cosmic Trigger – Wilson developed a wayward if deeply self-reflexive theory and dialectical method of visionary practice, one that, amidst the paranoia, presented its own deconstructive and libertarian vision of gnosis. This essay contextualizes and unpacks Wilson’s visionary pragmatism in terms of Foucault’s roughly contemporaneous notion of “technologies of self,” later elaborated by Peter Sloterdijk as “anthropotechnics.” It also traces the specific debts that Wilson owed to other esoteric and psychedelic technologists of the self, including Aleister Crowley, Timothy Leary, and John Lilly.

Abstract The short demand to bring Paul’s coat in 2 Timothy 4:13 has been a part of exegetical discussion for a long time. Especially the intention, the text pragmatics and the meaning of this verse are a matter of academic dispute. The point is: The interpretation of this verse has an important impact on the question of the authentic or pseudepigraphic character of 2 Tim. The following article focusses on an aspect that hasn’t been looked at much so far: the legal business of depositum as a possible historical backdrop. A third person’s (i.e. Timothy’s) mandate to pick up something deposited tells us much about his legitimacy as an authorized representative of the person who made the depositum (i.e. Paul). And possibly we also learn something about 2 Tim: 2 Tim as a letter could function as an authorizing document for the person sent out to pick up the coat – then 2 Tim 4:13 would work as a kind of certificate of authenticity of 2 Tim as an allegedly original Pauline letter.

Leafy timothy (Phleum pratense) silage (S), silage mixed with molasses (SM) and hay (H) were fed to nine male reindeer (Rangifer tarandus tarandus) calves in winter to investigate rumen function and digestion. Three calves were given S with 18.5% dry matter (DM), three were given SM (21.9% DM) and three were given H (85.0% DM). The content of water soluble carbohydrates (in % of DM) was 8.2% in S, 16.0% in SM and 8.5% in H. Median (range) daily DM food intake per kg BM was 12.9 (9-2-14.4) g in calves fed S, 19.0 (19-0-21.9) g in calves fed SM and 21.0 (19.2¬21.1) g in calves fed H. In vivo digestion of S and SM DM ranged from 78.5-83.1% compared to only 69-9-72.9% in calves fed H. In vitro DM digestion (IVDMD) of cellulose (median) incubated for 48 hours in rumen fluid was, however, significantly (F = 0.05) lower in calves fed S (24.4%) compared to calves fed SM (42.2%). Median IVDMD of cellulose (48 hours) in calves fed H was 36.4%. Total concentration of VFA (range) in the rumen fluid from reindeer fed H (99.7-113.6 mM) and was significantly (P<0.05) higher compared to animals fed S (57.7-85.9 mM) or SM (51.4-72.0 mM). Likewise, the pH of the rumen fluid (range) was significantly (P<0.05) lower in reindeer fed H (6.40-6.78) compared to animals fed S (6.97-7.30) or SM (6.79-7.27). Based on this study it is concluded that leafy timothy preserved as hay seems to be more suitable as emergency feed compared to silage. Supplementation of molasses to silage seems to stimulate food intake and ruminal cellulose digestion in reindeer. The lower intake of S compared to SM or H by reindeer may be explained by ruminal energy deficiency.

Timothy McCall, MD, is a board-certified internist, the medical editor of Yoga Journal, and the author of two books, Yoga as Medicine: The Yogic Prescription for Health and Healing and Examining Your Doctor: A Patient's Guide to Avoiding Harmful Medical Care. His articles have appeared in dozens of publications, including the New England Journal of Medicine, Journal of the American Medical Association, The Nation, The Boston Globe, The Philadelphia Inquirer, and The Los Angeles Times. Timothy has studied Yoga since 1995 with Patricia Walden, a teacher of classical Iyengar Yoga. More recently, he has been working with Donald Moyer and Rod Stryker. In addition, Timothy travels regularly to India to research Yoga, Yoga therapy, and Ayurveda and to study with a traditional Ayurvedic vaidhya (doctor) in Kerala and a Tantric master in Bangalore. After completing his residency in primary care internal medicine, he practiced for more than 10 years in the Boston area before devoting himself full-time to writing and research. His main focus since the year 2000 has been investigating the therapeutic aspects of Yoga, as well as the scientific explanations of Yoga's effects. In this interview, Dr. McCall (TM) and IJYT Editor-in-Chief Kelly McGonigal, PhD, (KM) discuss what Western medicine can learn from Yoga and Ayurveda, the risks of trying to license Yoga therapists, innovation in the history of Yoga therapy, and the challenges of conducting research on Yoga.

The status of women has generally become a human rights issue the world over, and Zimbabwe has not been left behind in that debate. Unfortunately, some men and women still believe that for women to occupy influential positions in society is testimony to the coming of the end of the world. As a way of buttressing men's patriarchal or chauvinistic views, the bible is invoked to remind women about their place and role in society. Using a random sampling method, interviews were conducted with twenty-five men and twenty-five women in Harare, Zimbabwe, on their perspective on 1 Timothy 2: 11 in the light of the empowerment of women in Zimbabwean society. This paper seeks to prove that negative perceptions against women are unhelpful and retrogressive and go against millennium development goals, particularly when biblical texts like 1 Timothy 2: 11–12, Ephesians 5: 25, 1 Peter 3: 1–2, 1 Corinthians 7: 4–5 and 1 Corinthians 14: 33b–35 are invoked to fight against the empowerment of women in the face of HIV and AIDS. Biblical texts like 1 Timothy 2: 11–12 can be applied out of context and erroneously used to serve or support patriarchal agendas – a position that this paper dismisses as morally untenable and disadvantageous to the rights of contemporary women. Yet the majority of women, as in the case of Zimbabwe, bear the effects of HIV and AIDS, poverty, unemployment and domestic violence.

Perennial grasses are less dependent on weather and soil conditions than other crops due to their plasticity, low demand for growing conditions, and a large variety of species. In 2013-2017 in the conditions of the Udmurt Republic the biological properties of meadow tetraploid clover (Trifolium pratense L.), alfalfa changeable (Medicago x varia Martyn), birds-foot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus L.), eastern galega (Galéga orientális Lam.) and timothy grass (Phleum pratense L.) in double and triple agrocenoses were studied according to the age of the grass stand and the term of mowing. Plant density of perennial grasses in agrocenoses depended on the biological characteristics of the species, the age of grass stand and the term of mowing. In the first year of use of agrophytocenoses the density of stalk stand was at the level of 374-542 pcs /m2, in the second year of use it was a little higher (348-688 pcs /m2), in the third year of use – 240-594 pcs /m2. High density of meadow tetraploid clover in the grass stand was noted in the second year of use – 266-520 pcs/m2. The number of timothy grass stems (122-194 pcs/m2) in the grass mixture was high even in the first year of grass stand use, in the following years there was a further increase of this indicator to 196-412 pcs/m2. By the third year of use there was an increase in the number of stems of alfalfa changeable to 86-148 pcs/m2 and birds-foot trefoil – up to 108-200 pcs/m2. The plant density of the eastern galega in agrocenoses was low. The agrometeorological conditions of the year and the term of mowing affected the height and leafiness of perennial grass plants in agrocenoses. The leafiness of meadow tetraploid clover reached 64%, of the eastern galega – 74%. Timothy grass plants were less leafy – 23-38%. The height of meadow clover plants was at the level of 51 cm, of timothy grass – 75-78 cm. Birds-foot trefoil was the shortest component of grass mixtures. High yield of dry mass of single-species sowing of meadow tetraploid clover was obtained in the first two years of use – 7.8 and 6.5 t/ha, respectively. By the third year of use, the productivity of clover decreased to 2.9 t/ha. The highest yields for the years of research were formed by the following agrocenoses: clover + alfalfa, clover + timothy, and clover + alfalfa + timothy – 5.9-6.3 t/ha.

ABSTRACT While 1 Tim 2:13–15 is often treated as providing three points in support of the paraeneses in vv. 11–12, this article argues that 1 Tim 2:13–15 forms an analogy that draws on the narrative sequence of Gen 2–3 to ground the commands of the preceding verses. The analogy draws a parallel between the events of the garden and the experience of the Ephesian church. It alerts them to the next step in the sequence following the transgression of Eve, which was the temptation and fall of Adam. The analogy is extended in v. 15 to show an alternative outcome whereby the Ephesian women, like Eve, may be saved from the consequences of their sin by embracing “faith, love, and holiness with propriety” as opposed to the rigors demanded by the false teachers. Rather than complete the pattern of the garden in which Eve persuaded Adam to sin, the Ephesian women are to learn peaceably, refrain from teaching the men, and submit themselves to duly appointed authorities. If the preceding verses, especially the demands of vv. 11–12, are grounded in this analogy, then it cannot be claimed that they are based on a “creation mandate,” which permanently subordinates women or forever prevents them from teaching men.

In 1 Timothy 1:13, the author frames Paul’s former life in Judaism as that of a “blasphemer, persecutor, and man of violence,” but then proceeds to urge Timothy to “fight the good fight” (1:18) by following Paul’s example of turning opponents over to Satan “so that they may learn not to blaspheme” (1:20). Although this discourse is regularly perceived as promoting nonviolence, this paper traces the legacies of violence in which the passage has participated. First, it considers the letter’s first audiences, for whom the charge of blasphemy appears as one of a larger set of cultural stereotypes the author uses to bolster prejudice against the rivals. Second, it situates this discourse about blasphemy within the (false) portrayal of Paul vis-à-vis Judaism that was perpetuated during the struggles between the church and the synagogue in the early centuries of the common era. Third, the paper briefly traces the ways that Christian rhetoric against Jews as blasphemers participated in acts of violence against Jews from the Middle Ages through the twentieth century. The paper concludes with a constructive critique of some readings of Pauline texts today, even those that overtly set out to understand these texts in a nonviolent manner.

Digital images with metadata contain unique potential for research into the history of the art market. The embedding of digital images in a database allows for the possibility of an association with their historical context due to the presence of metadata, which includes economic data, such as the provenance chain, as well as information about collecting practices. The database becomes a historical reconstruction of context accompanying the reproductions of the works. In this paper, a case study of a museum photo archive of forgeries illustrates the ways in which digital methods can be helpful in analyzing these contexts. The archive was run by the secret “Verband von Museums-Beamten zur Abwehr von Fälschungen und unlauterem Geschäftsgebahren” (Association of Museum Officials for Defense against Fakes and Improper Business Practices). This archive allows the engagement of early 20th century museums in the art market to be traced within specific genres. The goal of the case study and methodology presented here is to learn more about the economic practices of museums. Specifically, this paper reconsiders a study by Timothy Wilson on fake maiolica, with a new focus on the involvement of museums in the art market.

Problem solving skills are very important in supporting social development. Children with problem solving skills can build healthy relationships with their friends, understand the emotions of those around them, and see events with other people's perspectives. The purpose of this study was to determine the implementation of playing unplugged coding programs in improving early childhood problem solving skills. This study used a classroom action research design, using the Kemmis and Taggart cycle models. The subjects of this study were children aged 5-6 years in Shafa Marwah Kindergarten. Research can achieve the target results of increasing children's problem-solving abilities after going through two cycles. In the first cycle, the child's initial problem-solving skills was 67.5% and in the second cycle it increased to 80.5%. The initial skills of children's problem-solving increases because children tend to be enthusiastic and excited about the various play activities prepared by the teacher. The stimulation and motivation of the teacher enables children to find solutions to problems faced when carrying out play activities. So, it can be concluded that learning unplugged coding is an activity that can attract children's interest and become a solution to bring up children's initial problem-solving abilities. Keywords: Early Childhood, Unplugged Coding, Problem solving skills References: Akyol-Altun, C. (2018). Algorithm and coding education in pre-school teaching program integration the efectiveness of problem-solving skills in students. Angeli, C., Smith, J., Zagami, J., Cox, M., Webb, M., Fluck, A., & Voogt, J. (2016). A K-6 Computational Thinking Curriculum Framework: Implications for Teacher Knowledge. Educational Technology & Society, 12. Anlıak, Ş., & Dinçer, Ç. (2005). Farklı eğitim yaklaşımları uygulayan okul öncesi eğitim kurumlarına devam eden çocukların kişilerarası problem çözme becerilerinin değerlendirilmesi. Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakülte Dergis. Aranda, G., & Ferguson, J. P. (2018). Unplugged Programming: The future of teaching computational thinking? Pedagogika, 68(3). https://doi.org/10.14712/23362189.2018.859 Arinchaya Threekunprapa. (2020). Patterns of Computational Thinking Development while Solving Unplugged Coding Activities Coupled with the 3S Approach for Self_Directed Learning. European Journal of Educational Research, 9(3), 1025–1045. Arı, M. (2003). Türkiye’de erken çocukluk eğitimi ve kalitenin önemiNo Title. Erken Çocuklukta Gelişim ve Eğitimde Yeni Yaklaşımlar. Armoni, M. (2012). Teaching CS in kindergarten: How early can the pipeline begin? ACM Inroads, 3(4), 18–19. https://doi.org/10.1145/2381083.2381091 Aydoğan, Y. (2004). İlköğretim ikinci ve dördüncü sınıf öğrencilerine genel problem çözme becerilerinin kazandırılmasında eğitimin etkisinin incelenmesi. Bell, T., Alexander, J., Freeman, I., & Grimley, M. (2009). Computer Science Unplugged: School students doing real computing without computers. 10. Berk, L. E. (2013). Bebekler ve çocuklar: Doğum öncesinden orta çocukluğa. N. Işıkoğlu Erdoğan, Çev. Bers, M. U. (2018). Coding, playgrounds, and literacy in early childhood education: The devel_opment of KIBO robotics and Scratch Jr. IEEE. Brackmann, C. P., Moreno-León, J., Román-González, M., Casali, A., Robles, G., & Barone, D. (2017). Development of computational thinking skills through unplugged activities in primary school. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series, 65–72. https://doi.org/10.1145/3137065.3137069 Brennan, K., & Resnick, M. (2012). New frameworks for studying and assessing the development of computational thinking. 25. Deek, F. P. (1999). The software process: A parallel approach through problem solving and program development. Computer Science Education. Demi̇Rer, V., & Sak, N. (2016). Programming Education and New Approaches Around the World and in Turkey. 26. Dereli-İman. (2014). Değerler eğitimi programının 5-6 yaş çocukların sosyal gelişimine etkisi: Sosyal beceri, psiko-sosyal gelişim ve sosyal problem çözme becerisi. Kuram ve Uygulamada Eğitim Bilimleri. Doğru, M., Arslan, A., & Şeker, F. (2011). Okul öncesinde uygulanan fen etkinliklerinin 5-6 yaş çocukların problem çözme becerilerine etkisi. Uluslararası Türkiye Eğiti Araştırmaları Kongresi. Erickson, A. S. G., Noonan, P., Zheng, C., & Brussow, J. A. (2015). The relationship between self-determination and academic achievement for adolescents with intellectual disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 36, 45–54. Fee, S. B., & Holland-Minkley, A. M. (2010). Teaching computer science through problems, not solutions. Computer Science Education, 20(2), 129–144. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2010.486271 Futschek, G., & Moschitz, J. (2010). Developing algorithmic thinking by inventing and playing algo_rithms. Gretter, S., & Yadav, A. (2016). Computational Thinking and Media & Information Literacy: An Integrated Approach to Teaching Twenty-First Century Skills. Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2013). Computational thinking in k-12: A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher. Harrop, W. (2018). Coding for children and young adults in libraries: A practical guide for librarians. 45. Hazzan, O., Lapidot, T., & Ragonis, N. (2011). Guide to Teaching Computer Science. Springer London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-85729-443-2 Horn, M. S., Crouser, R. J., & Bers, M. U. (2012). Tangible interaction and learning: The case for a hybrid approach. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 16(4), 379–389. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-011-0404-2 Hsu, T.-C., Chang, S.-C., & Hung, Y.-T. (2018). How to learn and how to teach computational thinking: Suggestions based on a review of the literature. Computers & Education, 126, 296–310. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.07.004 Ismail, M. N., Ngah, N. A., & Umar, I. N. (2010). Instructional strategy in the teaching of computer programming: A need assessment analyses. TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology. Ismail, M. N., Ngah, N. A., & Umar, I. N. (2010). Instructional Strategy in The Teaching of Computer Programming: A Need Assessment Analyses. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 9(2), 7. Jitendra, A. K., Petersen-Brown, S., Lein, A. E., Zaslofsky, A. F., Kunkel, A. K., Jung, P.-G., & Egan, A. M. (2013). Teaching Mathematical Word Problem Solving: The Quality of Evidence for Strategy Instruction Priming the Problem Structure. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 48(1), 51–72. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219413487408 Joohi Lee. (2019). Coding in early childhood. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood. Kalyuga, S., Renkl, A., & Paas, F. (2010). Facilitating flexible problem solving: A cognitive load perspective. Educational Psychology Review. Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R., & Nixon, R. (2014). The Action Research Planner. Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-4560-67-2 Kesicioğlu, O. S. (2015). Okul öncesi dönem çocukların kişilerarası problem çözme becerilerinin incelenmesi. Eğitim ve Bilim. Koksal Akyol, A. ve Didin, E. (2016). Ahlak gelisimi [Moral development]. In Cocuk Gelisimi icinde [In Child Development]. Lazakidou, G., & Retalis, S. (2010). Using computer supported collaborative learning strategies for helping students acquire self-regulated problem-solving skills in mathematics. Computers & Education, 54(1), 3–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.02.020 Looi, C.-K., How, M.-L., Longkai, W., Seow, P., & Liu, L. (2018). Analysis of linkages between an unplugged activity and the development of computational thinking. Computer Science Education, 28(3), 255–279. https://doi.org/10.1080/08993408.2018.1533297 McClure, E. R., Guernsey, L., Clements, D. H., Bales, S. N., Nichols, J., Kendall-Taylor, N., & Levine, M. H. (2017). Grounding science, technology, engineering, and math education in early childhood. 68. McLennan, D. P. (2017). Creating coding stories and games. Teaching Young Children. McNerney, TimothyS. (2004). From turtles to Tangible Programming Bricks: Explorations in physical language design. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 8(5). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-004-0295-6 Mittermeir, R. T. (2013). Algorithmics for preschoolers—A contradiction? Montemayor, J., Druin, A., Chipman, G., Farber, A., & Guha, M. L. (2004). Tools for children to create physical interactive storyrooms. Computers in Entertainment, 2(1), 12–12. https://doi.org/10.1145/973801.973821 Pane, J. F. (2002). A Programming System for Children that is Designed for Usability. 204. Papanastasiou, G., Drigas, A., Skianis, C., Lytras, M., & Papanastasiou, E. (2018). Virtual and augmented reality effects on K-12, higher and tertiary education students’ twenty-29 first century skills. Pellegrino, J. W., & Hilton, M. L. (2012). Education for Life and Work: Developing Transferable Knowledge and Skills in the 21st Century. Pila, S., Aladé, F., Sheehan, K. J., Lauricella, A. R., & Wartella, E. A. (2019). Learning to code via tablet applications: An evaluation of Daisy the Dinosaur and Kodable as learning tools for young children. Computers & Education, 128, 52–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.09.006 Root, J., Saunders, A., Spooner, F., & Brosh, C. (2017). Teaching Personal Finance Mathematical Problem Solving to Individuals with Moderate Intellectual Disability. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 40(1), 5–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/2165143416681288 Scanlan, D. A. (1989). Structured flowcharts outperform pseudocode: An experimental comparison. IEEE Software, 6(5), 28–36. https://doi.org/10.1109/52.35587 Sheehan, K. J., Pila, S., Lauricella, A. R., & Wartella, E. A. (2019). Parent-child interaction and children’s learning from a coding application. Computers & Education, 140, 103601. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103601 Shute, V. J., Sun, C., & Asbell-clarke, J. (2017). Demystifying computational thinking. Educational Research Review. Sigelman, C. K., & Rider, E. A. (2012). Life-span Human Development (7th ed.). Cengage Learning. Sullivan, A., & Bers, M. U. (2016). Robotics in the early childhood classroom: Learning outcomes from an 8-week robotics curriculum in pre-kindergarten through second grade. International Journal of Tech_nology and Design Education, 26, 3–20. Sullivan, A. A., Bers, M. U., & Mihm, C. (2017). International conference on com_putational thinking education. Imagining, Playing, and Coding with KIBO: Using Robot_ics to Foster Computational Thinking in Young ChildreImagining, Playing, and Coding with KIBO: Using Robot_ics to Foster Computational Thinking in Young Children. Sullivan, A., Elkin, M., & Bers, M. U. (2015). KIBO robot demo: Engaging young children in programming and engineering. Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, 418–421. https://doi.org/10.1145/2771839.2771868 Threekunprapa, A., & Yasri, P. (n. d.). (2020). The role of augmented reality based unplugged computer programming approach in the effectiveness of computational thinking. Uysal, A. & Kaya-Balkan, İ. (2015). Sosyal beceri eğitimi alan ve almayan okul öncesi çocukların, sosyal beceri ve benlik kavramı düzeyleri açısından karşılaştırılması. Psikoloji Çalışmaları. Vorderman, C. (2017). Computer coding for kids: A unique step-by-step visual guide, from binary code to building games. Voronina, L. V., Sergeeva, N. N., & Utyumova, E. A. (2016). Development of algorithm skills in preschool children. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 233, 155-159. Wang, D., Han, H., Zhan, Z., Xu, J., Liu, Q., & Ren, G. (2015). A problem solving oriented intelligent tutoring system to improve students’ acquisition of basic computer skills. Comput. Educ., 81, 102–112. Wang, D., Zhang, C., & Wang, H. (2010). Proceedings of the 10th international conference on interaction design and children. T-Maze: A Tangible Programming Tool for Children. Wang, Danli, Zhang, C., & Wang, H. (2011). T-Maze: A tangible programming tool for children. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children - IDC ’11, 127–135. https://doi.org/10.1145/1999030.1999045 Woods, D. R., Hrymak, A. N., Marshall, R. R., Wood, P. E., Crowe, C. M., Hoffman, T. W., Wright, J. D., Taylor, P. A., Woodhouse, K. A., & Bouchard, C. G. K. (1997). Developing Problem Solving Skills: The McMaster Problem Solving Program. Journal of Engineering Education, 86(2), 75–91. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.2168-9830.1997.tb00270.x Yıldırım, A. (2014). Okul öncesinde yaratıcı problem çözme etkinliklerinin yaratıcılığa etkisi (5 yaş örneği). Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey. Yohanes. (2018). Mengajarkan Computational Thinking dan Coding Pada Anak-Anak. Amazing Grace. https://blog.compactbyte.com/2018/05/26/mengajarkan-computational-thinking-dan-coding-pada-anak-anak/ Yu, K.-C., Fan, S.-C., & Lin, K.-Y. (2015). Enhancing Students’ Problem-Solving Skills Through Context-Based Learning. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 13(6), 1377–1401. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-014-9567-4 Yuksel, H. S. (2019). Experiences of Prospective Physical Education Teachers on Active Gaming within the Context of School-Based Physical Activity. European Journal of Educational Research, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.8.1.199 Zvarych, I., Kalaur, S. M., Prymachenko, N. M., Romashchenko, I. V., & Romanyshyna, O. Ia. (2019). Gamification as a Tool for Stimulating the Educational Activity of Students of Higher Educational Institutions of Ukraine and the United States. European Journal of Educational Research, 8(3). https://doi.org/10.12973/eu-jer.8.3.875

En este artículo se abordan diversos aspectos relacionados con el escritor Hermann Hesse: la obra de este autor y los jóvenes preparatorianos de los años sesenta en México; las novelas cortas de Hesse, inspiradas en su infancia, adolescencia y juventud; su búsqueda de la libertad conciente; Hesse, como un ejemplo de rebeldía y anticonformismo, su relación con la primera guerra mundial; su rechazo al nacionalsocialismo alemán; Hesse outsider, su influencia en Timothy Leary y en el movimiento hippie.

A LO LARGO DE LA HISTORIA, DIVERSOS ESTUDIOSOS SE HAN PREGUNTADO SOBRE COMO PODER LOGRAR UN ACCESO ILIMITADO A LA INFORMACIÓN Y DAR PIE A LA DEMOCRATIZACIÓN DEL SABER. A LA LUZ DEL AMBIENTE TECNOLÓGICO QUE HOY SE VIVE, ESTAS IDEAS EN RELACIÓN CON EL CONTEXTO ACTUAL. POR LA RAZÓN, EN ESTE ESCRITO SE MUESTRAN LAS PROPUESTAS HECHAS POR TRES IDEALISTAS: PAUL OTLET, TED NELSON Y TIMOTHY LEARY, PRECURSORES DE UN UNIVERSO EN DONDE LA INFORMACIÓN SEA LIBRE.

In the late 1960s, the University College Literary and Athletic Society (the Lit) sponsored three festivals devoted to “Pop” art, psychedelia, and propaganda. As part of the 1967 festival, the Lit unsuccessfully attempted to have Timothy Leary visit to discuss the usefulness of LSD. This paper explores the festivals at University College, the controversy they created, and their successes and failures as cultural events, within the context of the history of student protest in Canada and the attempt to meld extra-curricular and counter-curricular activities in the 1960s as part of a wider search for “relevance” at the University of Toronto and in Canada as a whole.

In the politically-charged atmosphere of 1970s Québec, the French-language countercultural magazineMainmisereprinted an image of a meeting in Algeria between Black Panther leader, Eldridge Cleaver and American countercultural icon, Timothy Leary. Taking this image as a case study, this article discusses the reproduction, representation, and reception of “Blackness” inMainmise,as it is enabled through print technologies. Multi-lingual translation, transposition of texts and images between cultural contexts, and circulation to multiple readerships characterize the magazine’s rejection of Left-neo-nationalist positions. Instead, the cumulative pages ofMainmisepropose a reinvented Québécois identity that is unhinged from territory or ethnic ancestry. Québec is imagined in terms of a planetary geography.

In one of his final pieces of writing, Timothy Leary—one of the most singularly iconic and influential figures of the 1960s counterculture, known especially for his advocacy of a “molecular revolution” premised upon hallucinogenic self-medication—proposes that [c]ounterculture blooms wherever and whenever a few members of a society choose lifestyles, artistic expressions, and ways of thinking and being that wholeheartedly embrace the ancient axiom that the only true constant is change itself. The mark of counterculture is not a particular social form or structure, but rather the evanescence of forms and structures, the dazzling rapidity and flexibility with which they appear, mutate, and morph into one another and disappear. (ix) But it is not just radical activists and ancient philosophers who celebrate the constancy of change; on the contrary, it is a basic principle of post-industrial capitalism, a system which relies upon the constant extraction of surplus value—this being the very basis of the accumulation of capital—through an ever-accelerating creation of new markets and new desires fostered via a perpetual cycle of technical obsolescence and social destabilisation. Far from being unambiguously aligned with a mode of resistance then (as seemingly inferred by the quote above), the imperative for change would appear to be a basic constituent of that which the latter seeks to undermine. The very concept of “counterculture” as an ideal and a practice has been challenged and contested repeatedly over the past fifty or so years, both inside and outside of the academy. For the most part, the notion of counterculture is understood to have emerged out of the tumultuous cultural shifts of the 1960s, and yet, at the same time, as Theodore Roszak—who first coined the term—notes, the intellectual heritage of such a movement draws upon a “stormy Romantic sensibility, obsessed from first to last with paradox and madness, ecstasy and spiritual striving” (91) that dates back to nineteenth century Idealist philosophy and its critique of a rapidly industrialising civilisation. My purpose in this paper is not to address these numerous conceptualisations of counterculture but instead to analyse specifically the enigmatic definition given by Leary above, whereby he conflates counterculture with the demand for continual change or novelty, arguing that the former appears precisely at the point when “equilibrium and symmetry have given way to a complexity so intense as to appear to the eye as chaos” (ix). Concerned that this definition is internally inconsistent given Leary’s understanding of counterculture as a profoundly anti-capitalist force, I will cursorily illustrate the contradictions that proceed when the notion of counterculture as resistance to capitalist hegemony is combined with the identification of counterculture as an authentic and repeated irruption of the new, albeit one that is inevitably domesticated by and subsumed into the dominant culture against which it is posed, as occurs in Leary’s account. The claim that I make here is that this demand for change as an end in itself is inextricably capitalist in its orientation, and as such, cannot be meaningfully understood as a structural externality to the capitalist processes that it strives to interrupt. Capitalism and Growth The study of counterculture is typically, and probably inevitably premised upon an opposition between a dominant culture and those emergent forces that seek to undermine it. In the words of Roszak, the American counterculture of the 1960s arose in defiance of the “modernizing, up-dating, rationalizing, planning” tendencies of technocracy, “that social form in which an industrial society reaches the peak of its organizational integration” (5). Similarly, for Herbert Marcuse, the philosopher perhaps most closely associated with this counterculture, and whose writings formed the intellectual lynchpin of the student protest movement at that time, “intensified progress seems to be bound up with intensified unfreedom,” and as a consequence, we must strive for “a non-repressive civilization, based on a fundamentally different experience of being, a fundamentally different relation between man [sic] and nature, and fundamentally different existential relations” (Eros 4-5). In both cases, the dominant culture is associated with a particular form of repression, based upon the false sense of freedom imposed by the exigencies of the market. “Free choice among a wide variety of goods and services does not signify freedom,” argues Marcuse, “if these goods and services sustain social controls over a life of toil and fear” (One-Dimensional 10). Most importantly, Marcuse observes that this facile freedom of choice is propped up by processes of continual renewal, transformation, and rationalisation—“advertising, public relations, indoctrination, planned obsolescence”—operating on the basis of a “relentless utilization of advanced techniques and science,” such that “a rising standard of living is the almost unavoidable by-product of the politically manipulated industrial society” (One-Dimensional 52-53). Writing at a time when the Keynesian welfare state was still a foregone conclusion, Marcuse denounces the way in which an increase in the quality of life associated with the rise of consumerism and lifestyle culture “reduces the use-value of freedom”, for “there is no reason to insist on self-determination if the administered life is the comfortable and even the ‘good’ life” (One-Dimensional 53). The late industrial society, in other words, is presented as driven by a repressive desublimation which does not merely replace the objects of a so-called “high culture” with those of an inferior mass culture, but totally liquidates any such distinction, reducing all culture to a mere process of consumption, divorced from any higher goals or purposes. This desublimation is able to maintain growth through the constant production of novelty—providing new objects for the purposes of consumption. This society is not stagnant then; rather, “[i]ts productivity and efficiency, its capacity to increase and spread comforts, to turn waste into need, and destruction into construction” all represent the demand for a continual production of the new that undergirds its own stability (One-Dimensional 11). This necessary dynamism, and the creative destruction that goes along with it, is a result of the basic laws of competition: the need not only to generate profit, but to maintain this profitability means that new avenues for growth must constantly be laid down. This leads to both a geographical expansion in search of new markets, and a psychological manipulation in order to cultivate needs, desires, and fantasies in consumers that they never knew they had, combined with a dramatic shift in the search for both raw materials and labour power toward the developing economies of Asia. The result, notes David Harvey, is to “exacerbate insecurity and instability, as masses of capital and workers shift from one line of production to another, leaving whole sectors devastated, while the perpetual flux in consumer wants, tastes, and needs becomes a permanent locus of uncertainty and struggle” (106). What we are seeing then, as these processes of production and demands for consumption accelerate, is not so much the maintenance of the comfortable and carefree life that Marcuse sees as destructive to culture; conversely, this acceleration is engendering a sense of disorientation and even groundlessness that leaves us in a state of continual anxiety and disquietude. Although these processes have certainly accelerated in recent years—not least because of the rise of high-speed digital networking and telecommunications—they were prominent throughout the second-half of the twentieth century (in varying degrees), and indicate a general logic of rationalisation and technical efficiency that has been the focus of critique from the proto-countercultural romanticism of the nineteenth century onward. It is Marx who observes that “[t]he driving motive and determining purpose of capitalist production is the self-valorization of capital to the greatest possible extent,” and it is precisely this seemingly unstoppable impetus toward accumulation that finds its most acute manifestation in our age of digital, post-industrial capitalism (449). What needs to be kept in mind is that capitalism is not opposed to those exteriorities that resist its logic; on the contrary, it is through its ability to appropriate them in a double movement whereby it simultaneously claims to act as the condition of their production and claims the right to represent them on its terms (through the universal sign of money) that capitalism is able to maintain its continual growth. Put simply, capitalism as an economic system and an ideological constellation has proved itself time and time again to be remarkably resilient not only to intellectual critique, but also to the concrete production of new forms of living seemingly contrary to its principles, precisely because it is able to incorporate and thus nullify such threats. The production of the new does not harm capitalism; on the contrary, capitalism thrives on such production. The odd contradiction of the mass society, writes Walter Benjamin, coheres in the way that “the novelty of products—as a stimulus to demand—is accorded an unprecedented importance,” whilst at the same time, “‘the eternal return of the same’ is manifest in mass production” (331). This production of novelty is, in other words, restricted by the parameters of the commodity form—the necessity that it be exchangeable under the terms of capital (as money)—such that its potential heterogeneity is restrained by its identity as a commodity. Capitalism is perfectly capable of creating new modes of living, but it does so specifically according to its terms. This poses a difficulty then for the study and advocacy of counterculture in the terms for which Leary advocates above, because the progressivism of the latter—referring to its demand for continual change and innovation (a demand that admittedly runs counter to the nostalgic romanticism that has motivated a great deal of countercultural thought and praxis, and is certainly not a universally accepted definition of counterculture more broadly)—is not necessarily easily distinguishable from the dominant culture against which it is counterposed. Raymond Williams expresses this frustration well when he observes that “it is exceptionally difficult to distinguish between those which are really elements of some new phase of the dominant culture […] and those which are substantially alternative or oppositional to it” (123). In other words, given that capitalism as an economic system and hegemonic cultural formation is so effective in producing the novelty that we crave—creating objects, ideas, and practices often vastly different to those residual traditions that preceded them—there is no obvious metric for determining when we are looking at a genuine alternative to this hegemony, and when we are looking at yet another variegated product of it. Williams makes a distinction here, whereby the emergence (in the strict sense of coming-into-being or genesis) of a new culture is presumed to be qualitatively different to mere novelty. What is not adequately considered is the possibility that this distinction is entirely illusory—that holding out hope for a qualitatively different mode of existence that will mark a distinct break from capitalist hegemony is in fact the chimera by which this hegemony is sustained, and its cycle of production perpetuated. There is an anxiety here that is present within (and one might suggest even constitutive of) present-day debates over counterculture, particularly in regard to the question of resistance, and what form it might take under the conditions of late capitalism. From Williams’s perspective, it can be argued that “all or nearly all initiatives and contributions, even when they take on manifestly alternative or oppositional forms, are in practice tied to the hegemonic,” such that “the dominant culture, so to say, at once produces and limits its own forms of counter-culture” (114). To argue this though, he goes on to suggest, would: overlook the importance of works and ideas which, while clearly affected by hegemonic limits and pressures, are at least in part significant breaks beyond them, which may again in part be neutralized, reduced, or incorporated, but which in their most active elements nevertheless come through as independent and original. (114)Authentic breaks in specific social conditions are not just a fantasy, he correctly observes, but have occurred many times across history—and not merely in the guise of violent revolutionary activity. What is needed, therefore, is the development of “modes of analysis which instead of reducing works to finished products, and activities to fixed positions, are capable of discerning, in good faith, the finite but significant openness of many actual initiatives and contributions” (114). For Williams, this openness is located chiefly within the semiotic indeterminacy of the artwork, and the resultant potentiality contained within it for individuals to develop resistant readings contrary to any dominant interpretation. These divergent readings become the sites upon which we might imagine new worlds and new ways of living. There is a sense of resignation in his solution though: an appeal to the autonomy of an artwork, and a momentary sublime glimpse of another world, that will inevitably be domesticated by capital. The difficulty that comes with understanding counterculture as an uncompromising demand for the new, over and against the mundane repetitions of commodity culture and lifestyle consumerism, is that it must reckon with the seemingly inevitable appropriation of these new creations by the system against which they are opposed. In such cases, the typical result is a tragic and fundamentally romantic defeatism, in which the creative individual (or community, etc.) must continue to create anew, knowing full well that their output will immediately find itself domesticated and enervated by the forces of capital. This specific conception of counterculture as perpetual change knows that it is doomed to failure, but takes pleasure in the struggle that nonetheless ensues. The Subsumption of Counterculture “Marx and Freud, perhaps, do represent the dawn of our culture,” writes philosopher Gilles Deleuze, “but Nietzsche is something entirely different: the dawn of counterculture” (142). Friedrich Nietzsche seems like an unlikely candidate for the originator of counterculture—his writings certainly bear little overt resemblance to the premises of the various movements that emerged in the 1960s, even though, as Roszak remarks, these movements actually largely issued forth from “the work of Freud and of Nietzsche, the major psychologists of the Faustian soul” (91)—but what he does share with Leary is a belief, expressed most clearly in his posthumous text The Will to Power (1967), in the political and ethical power of becoming, and the need to celebrate and affirm, rather than resist, a world that appears to be in constant, ineluctable flux. Rather than seeking merely to improve the status quo, Nietzsche works toward total and perpetual upheaval—a transvaluation of all values. In Deleuze’s words, he “made thought into a machine of war—a battering ram—into a nomadic force” (149). At a time when resistance to capitalism seems futile; when the possibility of capitalism ending seems more and more distant (which is not to say that it is unlikely to end anytime soon, but merely that its plausible alternatives have been evacuated from the popular imagination), such a claim can seem rather appealing. But how might we distinguish this conception of perpetual revolution of values from the creative destruction of capitalism itself? Why do we presume that there is such a distinction to be made? Why should Leary’s call for rapidity and flexibility—and more broadly, a celebration of change over constancy—be seen as anything other than an acknowledgement and reinforcement of capitalism’s accelerating cycle of obsolescence? The uncomfortable reality we must consider is that the countercultural, as an apparent exteriority waiting to be appropriated, plays an essential role in the accumulation of capital that drives our economic system, and that accordingly, it cannot be plausibly understood as external to the structural conditions that it opposes. This is not to suggest that counterculture does not produce new possibilities, new opportunities, and new ways of living, but simply that its production is always already structured by capitalist relations—the precise anxiety acknowledged by Williams. Once again, this is not a dismissal of counterculture, just the opposite in fact. It is a rejection of the conflation that Leary makes between counterculture and novelty, the combination of which is supposed to provide a potent threat to capitalist hegemony. “The naive supposition of an unambiguous development towards increased production,” argues German philosopher Theodor Adorno, “is itself a piece of that bourgeois outlook which permits development because […] it is hostile to qualitative difference” (156). Capitalism produces many different types of commodities (within which we can include ideas, beliefs, means of communication, as well as physical goods in the traditional sense), but what unites them is their shared identity under the regime of exchange value (money). This exchange value masks their genuine heterogeneity. But what use is it simply reassuring us that if we continue to produce, we may eventually produce something so new, so different that it will evade capture by this logic? Does this not merely reinforce a complicity between the appeal of the countercultural as a force of change and the continuous accumulation of capital? I would contend that to define counterculture as the production of the new underwrites the inexhaustible productivism of the capitalist hegemony that it seeks to challenge. What if, then, this qualitative difference was created not through the production of the new, but the total rejection of this production as the means to resistance? This would not be to engender or encourage a state of total stasis (which is definitely not a preferable or plausible scenario), but rather, to detach the hope for a better world from the idea that we must achieve this by somehow adding to the world that we already have—to recognise, as Adorno would have it, that “the forces of production are not the deepest substratum of man [sic], but represent his historical form adapted to the production of commodities” (156). Leary’s peculiar conception of counterculture that we have been examining throughout this paper refuses to give countenance to any kind of stability or equilibrium, instead proffering an essentially Nietzschean mode of resistance in which incessant creativity becomes the means to the contrivance of a new world—this is part of what Roszak records as the rejection of Marx’s “compulsive hard-headedness” and the embrace of “[m]yth, religion, dreams, visions” which mark the fundamental romanticism of (post-)1960s counterculture, and its heritage in nineteenth century bourgeois sensibilities. For all the benefits that such a conception of counterculture has provided, it would seem misguided to ignore the ways in which Leary’s rhetoric is undermined by the simple fact that it presumes a hierarchy between a dominant culture (capitalism) and its resistant periphery that is already structured by and given through a capitalist mode of thought that presumes its own self-sufficiency (that is, it assumes the adequacy of the logic of exchange to homogenise all products under the commodity form). The postulate that grounds Leary’s understanding of counterculture is a covert identification of man/woman as a restless, alienated being who will never reach a state of stability or actualisation, and must instead continue to produce in the vain hope that this might finally and definitely change things for the better. Instead of embracing the constancy of change, an ideology that ends up justifying the excesses of a capitalist order that knows nothing other than production, perhaps it is possible to begin reconceptualising counterculture in terms that resist precisely this demand for novelty. As Alexander Galloway declares, “[i]t is time now to subtract from this world, not add to it,” for the “political does not arise from the domain of production” (138-139). We do not need more well-intentioned ideas regarding how the world could be a better place or what new possibilities are on offer—we know these things already, we hear about them every day. What we need, and what perhaps counterculture can offer, is to affirm the truth of that which does not need to be produced, which is always already given to us through the immanence of human thought. In the words of François Laruelle, this is an understanding of human individuals as ordinary, “stripped of qualities or attributes by a wholly positive sufficiency,” such that “they lack nothing, are not alienated,” whereby the identity of the individual “is defined by characteristics that are absolutely original, primitive, internal, and without equivalent in the World […] not ideal essences, but finite, inalienable (and consequently irrecusable) lived experiences” (48-49). The job of counterculture then becomes not so much creating that which did not exist prior, but of realising “what we already know to be true” (Galloway 139). References Adorno, Theodor. Minima Moralia: Reflections on a Damaged Life. London and New York: Verso, 1974. Benjamin, Walter. The Arcades Project. Ed. Rolf Tiedemann. Cambridge and London: The Belknapp Press, 1999. Deleuze, Gilles. “Nomad Thought.” The New Nietzsche: Contemporary Styles of Interpretation. Ed. David B. Allison. New York City: Dell Publishing, 1977: 142-149. Galloway, Alexander R. The Interface Effect. Cambridge and Malden: Polity, 2012. Harvey, David. The Condition of Postmodernity: An Enquiry into the Origins of Cultural Change. Cambridge and Oxford: Blackwell, 1989. Laruelle, François. From Decision to Heresy: Experiments in Non-Standard Thought. Ed. Robin Mackay. Falmouth: Urbanomic, 2012. Leary, Timothy. “Foreword.” Counterculture through the Ages: From Abraham to Acid House. Ken Goffman and Dan Joy. New York City: Villard Books, 2004: ix-xiv. Marcuse, Herbert. One Dimensional Man. London and New York: Routledge, 1991. ---. Eros and Civilization: A Philosophical Inquiry into Freud. London: Routledge, 1998. Marx, Karl. Capital, Volume One. London: Penguin, 1976. Nietzsche, Friedrich. The Will to Power. Ed. Walter Kaufmann. New York: Vintage Books, 1967. Roszak, Theodore. The Makings of a Counter Culture. Garden City, New York: Anchor Books, 1969. Williams, Raymond. Marxism and Literature. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 1977.

One of the most discussed problems regarding climate science is that the knowledge it claims to have is plagued by uncertainty. Timothy Morton’s dark ecology regards uncertainty as inextricable from any knowledge and also from any relation in general. This approach reveals that a rejection of uncertainty motivates both climate change deniers and their critics who would treat the conclusions of climate science as indisputable facts. Instead of treating uncertainty as a problem, dark ecology proposes that we learn how to live with it. But in order to do so, it recommends not only becoming attuned to the weird, “dark” side of things, but also tacitly suggests that the dark side is the only real one. Dark ecology is therefore bound to disregard those realms of human existence which are dependent upon transparency, such as public and political life. However, the article shows that particular processes in those realms have contributed significantly to the way the weird reality described by dark ecology became perceptible. Many of the features of global warming that dark ecology emphasizes - the impossibility of distancing oneself from it or of defining it completely and controlling it - become apparent only when a broad public controversy about its reality emerges and that controversy can never be resolved by citing allegedly certain facts The participants in such a controversy find that is impossible to convert the knowledge they have into a consensus. The article recommends taking that experience as a step toward attuning oneself to weird reality in which knowledge is more impotence than power.

On 19 January 1975, Australia’s first youth station 2JJ (Double Jay) launched itself onto the nation’s airwaves with a NASA-style countdown and You Only Like Me ‘Cause I’m Good in Bed by Australian band Skyhooks. Refused airtime by the commercial stations because of its explicit sexual content, this song was a clear signifier of the new station’s intent—to occupy a more radical territory on Australian radio. Indeed, Double Jay’s musical entrée into the highly restrictive local broadcasting environment of the time has gone on to symbolise both the station’s role in its early days as an enfant terrible of radio (Inglis 376), and its near 40 years as a voice for youth culture in Australia (Milesago, Double Jay). In this paper we explore the proposition that Double Jay functioned as an outlet for youth counterculture in Australia, and that it achieved this even with (and arguably because of) its credentials as a state-generated entity. This proposition is considered via brief analysis of the political and musical context leading to the establishment of Double Jay. We intend to demonstrate that although the station was deeply embedded in “the system” in material and cultural terms, it simultaneously existed in an “uneasy symbiosis” (Martin and Siehl 54) with this system because it consciously railed against the mainstream cultures from which it drew, providing a public and active vehicle for youth counterculture in Australia. The origins of Double Jay thus provide one example of the complicated relationship between culture and counterculture, and the multiple ways in which the two are inextricably linked. As a publicly-funded broadcasting station Double Jay was liberated from the industrial imperatives of Australia’s commercial stations which arguably drove their predisposition for formula. The absence of profit motive gave Double Jay’s organisers greater room to experiment with format and content, and thus the potential to create a genuine alternative in Australia broadcasting. As a youth station Double Jay was created to provide a minority with its own outlet. The Labor government committed to wrenching airspace from the very restrictive Australian broadcasting “system” (Wiltshire and Stokes 2) to provide minority voices with room to speak and to be heard. Youth was identified by the government as one such minority. The Australian Broadcasting Commission (ABC) contributed to this process by enabling young staffers to establish the semi-independent Contemporary Radio Unit (CRU) (Webb) and within this a youth station. Not only did this provide a focal point around which a youth collective could coalesce, but the distinct place and identity of Double Jay within the ABC offered its organisers the opportunity to ignore or indeed subvert some of the perceived strictures of the “mothership” that was the ABC, whether in organisational, content and/or stylistic terms. For these and other reasons Double Jay was arguably well positioned to counter the broadcasting cultures that existed alongside this station. It did so stylistically, and also in more fundamental ways, At the same time, however, it “pillaged the host body at random” (Webb) co-opting certain aspects of these cultures (people, scheduling, content, administration) which in turn implicated Double Jay in the material and cultural practices of those mainstream cultures against which it railed. Counterculture on the Airwaves: Space for Youth to Play? Before exploring these themes further, we should make clear that Double Jay’s legitimacy as a “counterculture” organisation is observably tenuous against the more extreme renderings of the concept. Theodore Roszak, for example, requires of counterculture something “so radically disaffiliated from the mainstream assumptions of our society that it scarcely looks to many as a culture at all” (5). Double Jay was a brainchild of the state: an outcome of the Whitlam Government’s efforts to open up the nation’s airwaves (Davis, Government; McClelland). Further, the supervision of this station was given to the publicly funded Australian national broadcaster, the ABC (Inglis). Any claim Double Jay has to counterculture status then is arguably located in less radical invocations of the term. Some definitions, for example, hold that counterculture contains value systems that run counter to culture, but these values are relational rather than divorced from each other. Kenneth Leech, for example, states that counterculture is "a way of life and philosophy which at central points is in conflict with the mainstream society” (Desmond et al. 245, our emphasis); E.D. Batzell defines counterculture as "a minority culture marked by a set of values, norms and behaviour patterns which contradict those of the dominant society" (116, our emphasis). Both definitions imply that counterculture requires the mainstream to make sense of what it is doing and why. In simple terms then, counterculture as the ‘other’ does not exist without its mainstream counterpoint. The particular values with which counterculture is in conflict are generated by “the system” (Heath and Potter 6)—a system that imbues “manufactured needs and mass-produced desires” (Frank 15) in the masses to encourage order, conformity and consumption. Counterculture seeks to challenge this “system” via individualist, expression-oriented values such as difference, diversity, change, egalitarianism, and spontaneity (Davis On Youth; Leary; Thompson and Coskuner‐Balli). It is these kinds of counterculture values that we demonstrate were embedded in the content, style and management practices within Double Jay. The Whitlam Years and the Birth of Double Jay Double Jay was borne of the Whitlam government’s brief but impactful period in office from 1972 to 1975, after 23 years of conservative government in Australia. Key to the Labor Party’s election platform was the principle of participatory democracy, the purpose of which was “breaking down apathy and maximising active citizen engagement” (Cunningham 123). Within this framework, the Labor Party committed to opening the airwaves, and reconfiguring the rhetoric of communication and media as a space of and for the people (Department of the Media 3). Labor planned to honour this commitment via sweeping reforms that would counter the heavily concentrated Australian media landscape through “the encouragement of diversification of ownership of commercial radio and television”—and in doing so enable “the expression of a plurality of viewpoints and cultures throughout the media” (Department of the Media 3). Minority groups in particular were to be privileged, while some in the Party even argued for voices that would actively agitate. Senator Jim McClelland, for one, declared, “We say that somewhere in the system there must be broadcasting which not only must not be afraid to be controversial but has a duty to be controversial” (Senate Standing Committee 4). One clear voice of controversy to emerge in the 1960s and resonate throughout the 1970s was the voice of youth (Gerster and Bassett; Langley). Indeed, counterculture is considered by some as synonymous with a particular strain of youth culture during this time (Roszak; Leech). The Labor Government acknowledged this hitherto unrecognised voice in its 1972 platform, with Minister for the Media Senator Doug McClelland claiming that his party would encourage the “whetting of the appetite” for “life and experimentation” of Australia’s youth – in particular through support for the arts (160). McClelland secured licenses for two “experimental-type” stations under the auspices of the ABC, with the youth station destined for Sydney via the ABC’s standby transmitter in Gore Hill (ABCB, 2). Just as the political context in early 1970s Australia provided the necessary conditions for the appearance of Double Jay, so too did the cultural context. Counterculture emerged in the UK, USA and Europe as a clear and potent force in the late 1960s (Roszak; Leech; Frank; Braunstein and Doyle). In Australia this manifested in the 1960s and 1970s in various ways, including political protest (Langley; Horne); battles for the liberalisation of censorship (Hope and Dickerson, Liberalisation; Chipp and Larkin); sex and drugs (Dawson); and the art film scene (Hope and Dickerson, Happiness; Thoms). Of particular interest here is the “lifestyle” aspect of counterculture, within which the value-expressions against the dominant culture manifest in cultural products and practices (Bloodworth 304; Leary ix), and more specifically, music. Many authors have suggested that music was pivotal to counterculture (Bloodworth 309; Leech 8), a key “social force” through which the values of counterculture were articulated (Whiteley 1). The youth music broadcasting scene in Australia was extremely narrow prior to Double Jay, monopolised by a handful of media proprietors who maintained a stranglehold over the youth music scene from the mid-50s. This dominance was in part fuelled by the rising profitability of pop music, driven by “the dreamy teenage market”, whose spending was purely discretionary (Doherty 52) and whose underdeveloped tastes made them “immune to any sophisticated disdain of run-of-the-mill” cultural products (Doherty 230-231). Over the course of the 1950s the commercial stations pursued this market by “skewing” their programs toward the youth demographic (Griffen-Foley 264). The growing popularity of pop music saw radio shift from a “multidimensional” to “mono-dimensional” medium according to rock journalist Bruce Elder, in which the “lowest-common-denominator formula of pop song-chat-commercial-pop-song” dominated the commercial music stations (12). Emblematic of this mono-dimensionalism was the appearance of the Top 40 Playlist in 1958 (Griffin-Foley 265), which might see as few as 10–15 songs in rotation in peak shifts. Elder claims that this trend became more pronounced over the course of the 1960s and peaked in 1970, with playlists that were controlled with almost mechanical precision [and] compiled according to American-devised market research methods which tended to reinforce repetition and familiarity at the expense of novelty and diversity. (12) Colin Vercoe, whose job was to sell the music catalogues of Festival Records to stations like 2UE, 2SER and SUW, says it was “an incredibly frustrating affair” to market new releases because of the rigid attachment by commercials to the “Top 40 of endless repeats” (Vercoe). While some air time was given to youth music beyond the Top 40, this happened mostly in non-peak shifts and on weekends. Bill Drake at 2SM (who was poached by Double Jay and allowed to reclaim his real name, Holger Brockmann) played non-Top 40 music in his Sunday afternoon programme The Album Show (Brockmann). A more notable exception was Chris Winter’s Room to Move on the ABC, considered by many as the predecessor of Double Jay. Introduced in 1971, Room to Move played all forms of contemporary music not represented by the commercial broadcasters, including whole albums and B sides. Rock music’s isolation to the fringes was exacerbated by the lack of musical sales outlets for rock and other forms of non-pop music, with much music sourced through catalogues, music magazines and word of mouth (Winter; Walker). In this context a small number of independent record stores, like Anthem Records in Sydney and Archie and Jugheads in Melbourne, appear in the early 1970s. Vercoe claims that the commercial record companies relentlessly pursued the closure of these independents on the grounds they were illegal entities: The record companies hated them and they did everything they could do close them down. When (the companies) bought the catalogue to overseas music, they bought the rights. And they thought these record stores were impinging on their rights. It was clear that a niche market existed for rock and alternative forms of music. Keith Glass and David Pepperell from Archie and Jugheads realised this when stock sold out in the first week of trade. Pepperell notes, “We had some feeling we were doing something new relating to people our own age but little idea of the forces we were about to unleash”. Challenging the “System” from the Inside At the same time as interested individuals clamoured to buy from independent record stores, the nation’s first youth radio station was being instituted within the ABC. In October 1974, three young staffers—Marius Webb, Ron Moss and Chris Winter— with the requisite youth credentials were briefed by ABC executives to build a youth-style station for launch in January 1975. According to Winter “All they said was 'We want you to set up a station for young people' and that was it!”, leaving the three with a conceptual carte blanche–although assumedly within the working parameters of the ABC (Webb). A Contemporary Radio Unit (CRU) was formed in order to meet the requirements of the ABC while also creating a clear distinction between the youth station and the ABC. According to Webb “the CRU gave us a lot of latitude […] we didn’t have to go to other ABC Departments to do things”. The CRU was conscious from the outset of positioning itself against the mainstream practices of both the commercial stations and the ABC. The publicly funded status of Double Jay freed it from the shackles of profit motive that enslaved the commercial stations, in turn liberating its turntables from baser capitalist imperatives. The two coordinators Ron Moss and Marius Webb also bypassed the conventions of typecasting the announcer line-up (as was practice in both commercial and ABC radio), seeking instead people with charisma, individual style and youth appeal. Webb told the Sydney Morning Herald that Double Jay’s announcers were “not required to have a frontal lobotomy before they go on air.” In line with the individual- and expression-oriented character of the counterculture lifestyle, it was made clear that “real people” with “individuality and personality” would fill the airwaves of Double Jay (Nicklin 9). The only formula to which the station held was to avoid (almost) all formula – a mantra enhanced by the purchase in the station’s early days of thousands of albums and singles from 10 or so years of back catalogues (Robinson). This library provided presenters with the capacity to circumvent any need for repetition. According to Winter the DJs “just played whatever we wanted”, from B sides to whole albums of music, most of which had never made it onto Australian radio. The station also adapted the ABC tradition of recording live classical music, but instead recorded open-air rock concerts and pub gigs. A recording van built from second-hand ABC equipment captured the grit of Sydney’s live music scene for Double Jay, and in so doing undercut the polished sounds of its commercial counterparts (Walker). Double Jay’s counterculture tendencies further extended to its management style. The station’s more political agitators, led by Webb, sought to subvert the traditional top-down organisational model in favour of a more egalitarian one, including a battle with the ABC to remove the bureaucratic distinction between technical staff and presenters and replace this with the single category “producer/presenter” (Cheney, Webb, Davis 41). The coordinators also actively subverted their own positions as coordinators by holding leaderless meetings open to all Double Jay employees – meetings that were infamously long and fraught, but also remembered as symbolic of the station’s vibe at that time (Frolows, Matchett). While Double Jay assumed the ABC’s focus on music, news and comedy, at times it politicised the content contra to the ABC’s non-partisan policy, ignored ABC policy and practice, and more frequently pushed its contents over the edges of what was considered propriety and taste. These trends were already present in pockets of the ABC prior to Double Jay: in current affairs programmes like This Day Tonight and Four Corners (Harding 49); and in overtly leftist figures like Alan Ashbolt (Bowman), who it should be noted had a profound influence over Webb and other Double Jay staff (Webb). However, such an approach to radio still remained on the edges of the ABC. As one example of Double Jay’s singularity, Webb made clear that the ABC’s “gentleman’s agreement” with the Federation of Australian Commercial Broadcasters to ban certain content from airplay would not apply to Double Jay because the station would not “impose any censorship on our people” – a fact demonstrated by the station’s launch song (Nicklin 9). The station’s “people” in turn made the most of this freedom with the production of programmes like Gayle Austin’s Horny Radio Porn Show, the Naked Vicar Show, the adventures of Colonel Chuck Chunder of the Space Patrol, and the Sunday afternoon comic improvisations of Nude Radio from the team that made Aunty Jack. This openness also made its way into the news team, most famously in its second month on air with the production of The Ins and Outs of Love, a candid documentary of the sexual proclivities and encounters of Sydney’s youth. Conservative ABC staffer Clement Semmler described the programme as containing such “disgustingly explicit accounts of the sexual behaviour of young teenagers” that it “aroused almost universal obloquy from listeners and the press” (35). The playlist, announcers, comedy sketches, news reporting and management style of Double Jay represented direct challenges to the entrenched media culture of Australia in the mid 1970s. The Australian National Commission for UNESCO noted at the time that Double Jay was “variously described as political, subversive, offensive, pornographic, radical, revolutionary and obscene” (7). While these terms were understandable given the station’s commitment to experiment and innovation, the “vital point” about Double Jay was that it “transmitted an electronic reflection of change”: What the station did was to zero in on the kind of questioning of traditional values now inherent in a significant section of the under 30s population. It played their music, talked in their jargon, pandered to their whims, tastes, prejudices and societal conflicts both intrinsic and extrinsic. (48) Conclusion From the outset, Double Jay was locked in an “uneasy symbiosis” with mainstream culture. On the one hand, the station was established by federal government and its infrastructure was provided by state funds. It also drew on elements of mainstream broadcasting in multiple ways. However, at the same time, it was a voice for and active agent of counterculture, representing through its content, form and style those values that were considered to challenge the ‘system,’ in turn creating an outlet for the expression of hitherto un-broadcast “ways of thinking and being” (Leary). As Henry Rosenbloom, press secretary to then Labor Minister Dr Moss Cass wrote, Double Jay had the potential to free its audience “from an automatic acceptance of the artificial rhythms of urban and suburban life. In a very real sense, JJ [was] a deconditioning agent” (Inglis 375-6). While Double Jay drew deeply from mainstream culture, its skilful and playful manipulation of this culture enabled it to both reflect and incite youth-based counterculture in Australia in the 1970s. References Australian Broadcasting Control Board. Development of National Broadcasting and Television Services. ABCB: Sydney, 1976. Batzell, E.D. “Counter-Culture.” Blackwell Dictionary of Twentieth-Century Social Thought. Eds. Williams Outhwaite and Tom Bottomore. Oxford: Blackwell, 1994. 116-119. Bloodworth, John David. “Communication in the Youth Counterculture: Music as Expression.” Central States Speech Journal 26.4 (1975): 304-309. Bowman, David. “Radical Giant of Australian Broadcasting: Allan Ashbolt, Lion of the ABC, 1921-2005.” Sydney Morning Herald 15 June 2005. 15 Sep. 2013 ‹http://www.smh.com.au/news/Obituaries/Radical-giant-of-Australian-broadcasting/2005/06/14/1118645805607.html›. Braunstein, Peter, and Michael William Doyle. Eds. Imagine Nation: The American Counterculture of the 1960s and '70s New York: Taylor and Francis, 2002. Brockman, Holger. Personal interview. 8 December 2013. Cheney, Roz. Personal interview. 10 July 2013. Chipp, Don, and John Larkin. Don Chipp: The Third Man. Adelaide: Rigby, 2008. Cunningham, Frank. Theories of Democracy: A Critical Introduction. London: Routledge, 2002. Davis, Fred. On Youth Subcultures: The Hippie Variant. New York: General Learning Press, 1971. Davis, Glyn. "Government Decision‐Making and the ABC: The 2JJ Case." Politics 19.2 (1984): 34-42. Dawson, Jonathan. "JJJ: Radical Radio?." Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies 6.1 (1992): 37-44. Department of the Media. Submission by the Department of the Media to the Independent Inquiry into Frequency Modulation Broadcasting. Sydney: Australian Government Publishers, 1974. Desmond, John, Pierre McDonagh, and Stephanie O'Donohoe. “Counter-Culture and Consumer Society.” Consumption Markets & Culture 4.3 (2000): 241-279. Doherty, Thomas. Teenagers and Teenpics: The Juvenilization of American Movies in the 1950s. Boston: Unwin Hyman, 1988. Elder, Bruce. Sound Experiment. Unpublished manuscript, 1988. Australian National Commission for UNESCO. Extract from Seminar on Entertainment and Society, Report on Research Project. 1976. Frolows, Arnold. Personal interview. 10 July 2013. Frank, Thomas. The Conquest of Cool: Business Culture, Counterculture, and the Rise of Hip Consumerism. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997. Gerster, Robin, and Jan Bassett. Seizures of Youth: The Sixties and Australia. Melbourne: Hyland House, 1991. Griffen-Foley, Bridget. Changing Stations: The Story of Australian Commercial Radio, Sydney: UNSW Press, 2009. Harding, Richard. Outside Interference: The Politics of Australian Broadcasting. Melbourne: Sun Books, 1979. Heath, Joseph, and Andrew Potter. Nation of Rebels: Why Counterculture Became Consumer Culture. New York: Harper Collins, 2004. Hope, Cathy, and Adam Dickerson. “The Sydney and Melbourne Film Festivals, and the Liberalisation of Film Censorship in Australia”. Screening the Past 35 (2012). 12 Aug. 2014 ‹http://www.screeningthepast.com/2012/12/the-sydney-and-melbourne-film-festivals-and-the-liberalisation-of-film-censorship-in-australia/›. Hope, Cathy, and Adam Dickerson. “Is Happiness Festival-Shaped Any Longer? The Melbourne and Sydney Film Festivals and the Growth of Australian Film Culture 1973-1977”. Screening the Past 38 (2013). 12 Aug. 2014 ‹http://www.screeningthepast.com/2013/12/‘is-happiness-festival-shaped-any-longer’-the-melbourne-and-sydney-film-festivals-and-the-growth-of-australian-film-culture-1973-1977/›. Horne, Donald. Time of Hope: Australia 1966-72. Sydney: Angus and Robertson, 1980. Inglis, Ken. This Is the ABC: The Australian Broadcasting Commission, 1932-1983. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press, 1983. Langley, Greg. A Decade of Dissent: Vietnam and the Conflict on the Australian Homefront. Sydney: Allen and Unwin, 1992. Leary, Timothy. “Foreword.” Counterculture through the Ages: From Abraham to Acid House. Eds. Ken Goffman and Dan Joy. New York: Villard, 2007. ix-xiv. Leech, Kenneth. Youthquake: The Growth of a Counter-Culture through Two Decades. London: Sheldon Press, 1973. Martin, J., and C. Siehl. "Organizational Culture and Counterculture: An Uneasy Symbiosis. Organizational Dynamics, 12.2 (1983): 52-64. Martin, Peter. Personal interview. 10 July 2014. Matchett, Stuart. Personal interview. 10 July 2013. McClelland, Douglas. “The Arts and Media.” Towards a New Australia under a Labor Government. Ed. John McLaren. Victoria: Cheshire Publishing, 1972. McClelland, Douglas. Personal interview. 25 August 2010. Milesago. “Double Jay: The First Year”. n.d. 8 Oct. 2012 ‹http://www.milesago.com/radio/2jj.htm›. Milesago. “Part 5: 1971-72 - Sundown and 'Archie & Jughead's”. n.d. Keith Glass – A Life in Music. 12 Oct. 2012 ‹http://www.milesago.com/Features/keithglass5.htm›. Nicklin, Lenore. “Rock (without the Roll) around the Clock.” Sydney Morning Herald 18 Jan. 1975: 9. Robinson, Ted. Personal interview. 11 December 2013. Roszak, Theodore. The Making of a Counter Culture. New York: Anchor, 1969. Semmler, Clement. The ABC - Aunt Sally and Sacred Cow. Carlton: Melbourne University Press, 1981. Senate Standing Committee on Education, Science and the Arts and Jim McClelland. Second Progress Report on the Reference, All Aspects of Television and Broadcasting, Including Australian Content of Television Programmes. Canberra: Australian Senate, 1973. Thompson, Craig J., and Gokcen Coskuner‐Balli. "Countervailing Market Responses to Corporate Co‐optation and the Ideological Recruitment of Consumption Communities." Journal of Consumer Research 34.2 (2007): 135-152. Thoms, Albie. “The Australian Avant-garde.” An Australian Film Reader. Eds. Albert Moran and Tom O’Regan. Sydney: Currency Press, 1985. 279–280. Vercoe, Colin. Personal interview. 11 Feb. 2014. Walker, Keith. Personal interview. 11 July 2013. Webb, Marius. Personal interview. 5 Feb. 2013. Whiteley, Sheila. The Space between the Notes: Rock and the Counter-Culture. London: Routledge, 1992. Wiltshire, Kenneth, and Charles Stokes. Government Regulation and the Electronic Commercial Media. Monograph M43. Melbourne: Committee for Economic Development of Australia, 1976. Winter, Chris. Personal interview. 16 Mar. 2013.

The book Cultural heritage and tourism – An Introduction is written by Dallen J. Timothy, professor at the Arizona State University, an enthusiast when it comes to cultural heritage, a person who has visited more than 120 countries. It is divided into two sections. Through the 12 chapters of the first section, the reader can become familiar with general concepts and issues related to cultural or heritage tourism, while in the second section, the reader will learn more about heritage tourism attractions.In the introductory chapter, structure and content of the book are presented. This chapter, Cultural heritage and tourism, starts with a description of the history of heritage tourism underlining important historical moments in heritage tourism such as The Seven Wonders, The Grand tour or Thomas Cook’s experience, which could be regarded as the origin of modern heritage tourism.A simplified definition of heritage is presented here: it is what we inherit from the past and use in nowadays. The author also introduces us to basic division of heritage on cultural (tangible and intangible) and natural. Further on, relationship between heritage tourism and cultural tourism is explained along with the problems of defining these terms. In the book, the author uses these two terms synonymously.In the second and third chapters, the importance of demand and supply of heritage tourism products and experiences are examined. General pattern of tourism demand is presented in the second chapter. The chapter focuses on the motivations of tourists and non-tourists in their consumption of cultural heritage. To understand the demand, geographic, demographic and psychographic characteristics of tourists are analyzed. Since the demand for all types of tourism is not constant and it changes with the economic, environmental, political and other changes, the so-called demand shifters are a subject of this chapter as well.In the next chapter, the author presents heritage sites which attract visitors and tourists. Most of them, such as museums, archeological sites and ancient monuments, religious sites, living culture, industrial heritage, difficult heritage or sites of death are further elaborated in the second part of the book, in chapters 14 – 21. A short description of additional services, which are an indispensable part of heritage supply, such as food, accommodation and transportation, is also presented in the third chapter.The spatial characteristics of heritage resources are discussed in the forth chapter along with the basic distinction between global, national, local/regional and personal heritage.The issue of authenticity is also one of the subjects of the book and it is discussed in the fifth chapter; decades old conceptual debates on this issue are presented. Is authenticity intrinsic to objects, artifacts and locations being visited, is it the tourists’ perception, or it does not matter at all? How to measure authenticity? All these questions are dealt with within this chapter.Many destinations are marketing themselves as unique and authentic, often even when the authenticity is questionable. Destinations are prone to use words such as “authentic”, “unique”, “sustainable” to sell their products, or to boost their image. The author describes these marketing tools in the twelfth chapter Marketing the past for today. Other marketing concepts are also discussed here. UNESCO World Heritage Sites is another example of attracting people.The author mentions World Heritage Site Angkor Wat in Cambodia as an example, but the example of Preah Vihear temple1 was omitted here although it would be an excellent example of this as it presents a very complex issue, showing how World heritage sites are great generators of income but also how putting some heritage on World heritage list could be a potential source of conflict situation. There are also some other aspects of World heritage sites (such as Dresden case) which could fit in the topic which are not presented in the book.Heritage is very often used or abused as a tool for achieving certain goals, especially political ones. What elements of heritage should be presented to tourists and which elements should be ignored – is usually a decision of politics. The use of heritage for touristic purposes is shown in the 6th chapter.Unfortunately, when conflicts or wars break out, one of the first goals is to destroy cultural heritage of the group, since it presents the essential component of the group identity. Through the topic War and its impact on the past, which is also a part of this chapter, the author explains this issue. Although many well known examples are presented, the author did not mention Hague Convention for the protection of Cultural property in the event of Armed Conflict, which is very important in such situations.It often happens that because of a great number of tourists, some of the most famous monuments of the world are seriously threatened. Much bigger problem than their age and natural processes of erosion are hundreds of thousands of tourists who visit them each year. Impacts of tourism can be negative, but also positive. Physical, socio-cultural impacts and economic impacts of heritage tourism are examined in the 7th chapter. How to deal with a great number of tourists and what techniques can be used to affect visitor behavior is explained in chapter 13, in which the author also addresses the financial problem, which the heritage sites managers are facing today.Unlike natural heritage, cultural heritage is not a renewable resource.Since it is also very easily damaged and destroyed, it is important to protect it from a legal aspect (topic of chapter 8), but also to conserve it properly. The importance of heritage conservation is discussed in the 9th chapter and it exami- nes the most common approaches to conservation problems such as preservation, renovation and restoration. What heritage is worthy to protect – the decision is often a political one, but can also be considered from the economic, scientific and social aspects.A very interesting chapter is the chapter 10, where the reader can learn about the methods of storytelling. Although the title of this chapter, Telling the story: Interpreting the past, may be associated with dissonant heritage2, the chapter presents the ways of telling stories in an interesting way so the visitors would want to learn more, or even visit the place again. It is also a very useful chapter since it provides the basic tools for making heritage places sustainable.The next chapter is also valuable as it provides information on how to make effective plans for meeting specific goals e.g. to mitigate the negative impacts of tourism and, at the same time, increase the positive impacts of tourism.The concluding chapter summarizes all topics discussed in the previous chapters. Generally, the book proves to be interesting and useful: a number of issues, current debates, concepts and practices are presented. It can be regarded as a thorough introduction into the topic of cultural or heritage tourism since all relevant topics in the field are covered and clearly explained using a number of interesting examples.The text can be useful for all those dealing with cultural heritage and tourism management, especially for the students, as it offers a good basis for understanding of the topic. Students may also find the form of the book helpful, in which each chapter has an overview of the learning objectives, and in the conclusion, a list of review questions as well as a long list of recommended literature for that topic.

Introduction As street protests and clashes between citizens and authorities in places as different as Ferguson, Missouri and Hong Kong in autumn 2014 demonstrate, everyday life in many parts of the world is characterised by conflicting and competing sets of cultural norms, values, and practices. The idea that groups create cultures that stand in contrast to “mainstream” or “dominant culture” is nothing new—sociology’s earliest scholars sought cultural explanations for social “dysfunctions” such as anomie and deviance. Yet our interest in this article is not about the problems that marginalised and non-normative groups face, but rather with the cultures that are created as part of dealing with those problems. Milton Yinger begins his 1982 book, Countercultures: The Promise and Peril of a World Turned Upside Down, by contrasting multiple perspectives on countercultures. Some thinkers have characterised countercultures as not only a mundane feature of social life, but as a necessary one: Countercultures and the many types of intentional communities they commonly create are not social aberrations. For thousands of years there have been attempts to provide alternatives for the existing social order in response to the perennial grounds for dissent: hierarchy and privilege […,] disgust with hedonism and consumerism […, and] a decline in the quality of life. (Yinger, Countercultures 1) Others, however, have discursively delegitimised countercultures by characterising them as something in between naiveté and unschooled arrogance. Speaking specifically about hippies in the 1960s, Bell argued that the so-called counter-culture was a children’s crusade that sought to eliminate the line between fantasy and reality and act out in life its impulses under a banner of liberation. It claimed to mock bourgeois prudishness, when it was only flaunting the closet behavior of its liberal parents. It claimed to be new and daring when it was only repeating in more raucous form […] the youthful japes of a Greenwich Village bohemia of a half century before. It was less a counter-culture than a counterfeit culture. (xxvi-xxvii) If Bell is at all right, then perhaps countercultures may be better understood as subcultures, a term that may not require the idea of opposition (but see Gelder; Williams, Subcultural). To tease this distinction out, we want to consider the value of the counterculture concept for the study of oppositional subcultures. Rather than uncritically assuming what counter means, we take a more analytical view of how “counter,” as similar to other terms such as “resistant” and “oppositional,” has been articulated by social scientists. In doing this, we focus our attention on scholarly works that have dealt explicitly with group cultures “that sharply contradict the dominant norms and values of the society of which that group is a part” (Yinger, Countercultures 3). The Relationship between Counterculture and Subculture Many scholars point to the Chicago School of sociology as developing the first clear articulation of subcultural groups that differed clearly from mainstream society (see for example, Gelder and Thornton; Hannerz, E.; Williams, Youth). Paul G. Cressey, Frederic Thrasher, and later William Foote Whyte each provide exemplary empirical studies of marginal groups that were susceptible to social problems and therefore more likely to develop cultures that were defined as problematic for the mainstream. Robert Merton argued that marginalised groups formed as individuals tried to cope with the strain they experienced by their inability to access the cultural means (such as good education and good jobs) needed to achieve mainstream cultural goals (primarily, material success and social status), but Albert Cohen and others subsequently argued that such groups often reject mainstream culture in favour of a new, alternative culture instead. Within a few years, conceptual distinctions among these alternative cultures were necessary, with counterculture and subculture being disambiguated in American sociology. Yinger originally employed the term contraculture but eventually switched to the more common counterculture. Subculture became most often tied either to the study of religious and ethnic enclaves (Mauss) or to deviance and delinquency (Arnold), while counterculture found its currency in framing the cultures of more explicitly political groups and movements (see for example, Cushman; George and Starr). Perhaps the clearest analytical distinction between the terms suggested that subculture refer to ascribed differences based upon socio-economic status, ethnicity, religion (and so on) in relation to the mainstream, whereas counterculture should refer to groups rooted in an explicit rejection of a dominant culture. This is similar to the distinction that Ken Gelder makes between subcultures based upon marginalisation versus non-normativity. Counterculture became best used wherever the normative system of a group contains, as a primary element, a theme of conflict with the values of the total society, where personality variables are directly involved in the development and maintenance of the group's values, and wherever its norms can be understood only by reference to the relationships of the group to a surrounding dominant culture. (Yinger, Contraculture 629) Even at that time, however, such a neat distinction was problematic. Sociologist Howard S. Becker demonstrated that jazz musicians, for example, experienced a problem shared in many service occupations, namely that their clients did not possess the ability to judge properly the value of the service rendered, yet nevertheless sought to control it. As a consequence, a subculture emerged based on the opposition of “hip” musicians to their “square” employers’ cultural sensibilities. Yet Becker framed their experiences as subcultural rather than countercultural, as deviant rather than political (Becker 79-100). Meanwhile, the political connotations of “counterculture” were solidifying during the 1960s as the term became commonly used to describe aspects of the civil rights movement in the US, hippie culture, and the anti-Vietnam or peace movement. By the end of the 1960s, subculture and counterculture had become analytically distinct terms within sociology. Cultural Studies and the Class-ification of Counterculture The reification of subculture and counterculture as ontologically distinct phenomena was more or less completed in the 1970s through a series of publications on British youth cultures and subcultures (see Hall and Jefferson; Hebdige; Mungham and Pearson). The Centre for Contemporary Cultural Studies (CCCS) in particular expended a great deal of collective mental energy theorising the material base upon which cultures—and in particular spectacular youth subcultures such as mods and punk—exist. As with Marxist analyses of culture more generally, class was considered a key analytic variable. In the definitive theoretical statement on subculture, Clarke, Hall, Jefferson, and Roberts argued that “the most fundamental groups are the social classes, and the major cultural configurations will be […] ‘class cultures’” (13). Subcultures were thus seen as ideological reactions to the material conditions experienced and made meaningful within working class “parent culture.” This is what made youth subcultures sub—a part of the working-class—as well as cultural—the process of expressing their structural position. Given the Marxist orientation, it should go without saying that subcultures, as working-class youth cultures, were seen as naturally in a state of conflict with bourgeois culture. But that approach didn’t account well for counter-currents that emerged from within the middle-class, whose relationship with the means of production was markedly different, and so the concept of counterculture was appropriated to describe a distinctly middle-class phenomenon. The idea that counterculture represented an overtly political response from within the dominant culture itself fitted with work by Theodore Roszak and Frank Musgrove, and later Yinger (Countercultures) and Ulf Hannerz, who each defined counterculture through its political and activist orientations stemming from a crisis within the middle-class. To further differentiate the concepts, the CCCS dismissed the collective aspect of middle-class resistance (see Clarke et al., 58-9, for a list of phenomena they considered exemplary of middle-class counterculture), describing it as more “diffuse, less group-oriented, [and] more individualised” than its working-class counterpart, the latter “clearly articulated [as] ‘near’ or ‘quasi’-gangs” (Clarke et al. 60). And whereas subcultures were centred on leisure-time activities within working-class environments, countercultures were concerned with a blurring of the boundaries between work and leisure. This conceptualisation was problematic at best, not least because it limits counterculture to the middle-class and subculture to the working class. It also gave considerably more agency and consequence to middle-class youths. It seemed that countercultures, with their individualist tendencies, offered individuals and groups choices about what and how to resist, as well as some expectations for social change, while subculturalists, locked within an unfortunate class position, could only resist dominant culture “at the profoundly superficial level of appearances” (Hebdige 17). Beyond the Limits of Class Cultures By 1980 cultural studies scholars had begun disassembling the class-basis of subcultures (see for example, G. Clarke; McRobbie; Griffin). Even though many studies still focused on stylised forms of opposition, subcultural scholarship increasingly emphasised subcultures such as punk as reflecting a more explicitly politicised resistance against the dominant or mainstream culture. Some scholars suggested that “mainstream culture” was used as a contrastive device to exaggerate the distinctiveness of those who self-identity as different (see U. Hannerz; Copes and Williams), while others questioned what subcultures could be seen as existing independently from, or in assumed opposition to (see Blackman; Thornton). In such cases, we can see a move toward reconciling the alleged limits of subculture as a countercultural concept. Instead of seeing subcultures as magical solutions and thus inevitably impotent, more recent research has considered the agency of social actors to overcome social divisions such as race, gender, and class. On the dance floor in particular, youth culture was theorised as breaking free of its class-binding shackles. Along with this break came the rhetorical distancing from CCCS’s definitions of subculture. The attempted development of “post-subculture” studies around the Millennium focused on consumptive behaviours among certain groups of youths and concluded that consumption rather than opposition had become a hallmark of youth culture broadly (see Bennett, Popular; Huq; Muggleton). For these scholars, the rave and club cultures of the 1990s, and others since, represent youth culture as hedonistic and relatively apolitical. “Post-subculture” studies drew in part on Steve Redhead’s postmodern approach to youth culture as found in The Clubcultures Reader and its companion text, From Subcultures to Clubcultures (Redhead). These texts offered a theoretical alternative to the CCCS’s view of oppositional subcultures and recognition that subcultural style could no longer be understood as a representation of ideological strain among working-class youths. Carried forward in volumes by David Muggleton and Rupert Weinzierl,,among others, “post-subcultural” scholarship criticised prior subcultural research for having objectified/reified mainstream/subcultural boundaries and authenticities, echoing Gary Clarke’s remark that the sharp distinction between us and them “rests upon [subculturalists’] consideration of the rest of society as being straight, incorporated in a consensus, and willing to scream undividedly loud in any moral panic” (71). Instead, the mixtures of punk, mod, skinhead and/or hippy styles among club-goers signalled “entirely new ways of understanding how young people perceive the relationship between music taste and visual style…revealing the infinitely malleable and interchangeable nature of the latter as these are appropriated and realised by individuals as aspects of consumer choice” (Bennett, Subcultures 613). Reincorporating the Counter into Subculture Studies The postmodern focus on cultural fluidity, individuality, and consumption highlights to some extent the agency that individuals have to make choices about the cultures in which they participate. To be sure, the postmodern and post-subculture critiques of class-based subculture studies were quite influential in the development of more recent subcultural scholarship, though not necessarily as they were intended. Much of the theoretical rhetoric of post-subculture scholarship (over-)emphasised heterogeneity, contingency, and play, which drew attention away from the collective identities and practices that continue to characterise many subcultures and groups. Fortunately, other scholars over the last decade have been critical of that approach’s failure to deal with perennial concerns related to participation in alternative cultural groups, including consumption (Buckingham), voice (Bae and Ivashkevich), education (Tuck and Yang), and group affiliation (Pilkington), among others. We want to follow this trajectory by explicitly reiterating the continuing significance of the “counter” aspects of subcultures. Two trends in social theory are exemplary in this reiteration. The first trend is a growing interest in re-theorizing resistance to refer to “a contribution to progressive transformations and radical changes in social and cultural structures” (Johansson and Lalander) rather than to a set of styles and practices through which working-class youth impotently rage against the machine. Resistance is qualitatively different from rebellion, which is often framed in terms of unconscious or irrational behaviour (Raby); resistance is first and foremost intentional. Subcultures articulate resistance to mainstream/dominant culture and may be measured across several continua, including passive to active, micro to macro, covert to overt, individual to collective, and local to global (see Williams, Resistance; E. Hannerz). Participants in countercultures see themselves as being more critically aware of what is happening in the world than the average person, believe that they act on that critical awareness in their thoughts, words, and/or deeds, and electively detach themselves from “involuntary or unconscious commitments” (Leary 253) to mainstream culture, refusing to uncritically follow the rules. The concept of resistance thus gives some momentum to attempts to clarify the extent to which members of alternative cultures intentionally break with the mainstream. The links between resistance and counterculture are explicitly dealt with in recent scholarship on music subcultures. Graham St John’s work on electronic dance music culture (EDMC), for example, offers a complex analysis of resistant practices that he conceptualizes as countercultural. Participation in EDMC is seen as more than simple hedonism. Rather, EDMC provides the scripts necessary for individuals to pursue freedom from various forms of perceived oppression in everyday life. At a more macro level, Madigan Fichter’s study of counterculture in Romania similarly frames resistance and political dissent as key variables in the articulation of a counterculture. Some recent attempts at invoking counterculture seem less convincing. Noting that counterculture is a relatively “unpopular term in social scientific research,” Hjelm, Kahn-Harris, and LeVine nevertheless proceed to theorize heavy metal as countercultural by drawing on the culture’s “transgressive” (14) qualities and “antagonistic […] attempts to shock and provoke [as well as] those occasions when metal, by its very presence, is shocking” (15). Other studies have similarly articulated “countercultures” in terms of behaviours that transgress mainstream sensibilities (see for example, Arthur and Sherman; Kolind). It is debatable at best, however, whether hedonism, transgression, or provocation are sufficient qualities for counterculture without concomitant cultural imperatives for both resistance and social change. This leads into a brief comment on a second trend, which is the growing interconnectedness of social theories that attend to subcultures on the one hand and “new” social movements (NSMs) on the other. “Traditional” social movements, such as the civil rights and labour movements, have been typically organised by and for people excluded in some way from full rights to participate in society, for example the rights to political participation or basic economic protection. NSMs, however, often involve people who already enjoy full rights as members of society, but who reject political and economic processes that injure them or others, such as marginalised groups, animals, or the environment. Some movements are contentious in nature, such as the Occupy-movement, and thus quite clearly antagonistic toward mainstream political-economy. NSM theories (see Pichardo), however, also theorize the roles of culture and collective identity in supporting both opposition to dominant processes and strategies for alternative practices. Other NSMs foster lifestyles that, through the minutiae of everyday practice, promote a ground-up reaction to dominant political-economic practices (see Haenfler, Johnson, and Jones). Both contentious and lifestyle movements are relatively diffuse and as such align with traditional conceptualisations of both subculture and counterculture. NSM theory and subcultural theories are thus coming together in a moment where scholars are seeking distinctly cultural understandings of collective lifestyles of resistance and social change. Conclusion Recent attempts to rephrase subcultural theory have combined ideas of the Birmingham and Chicago Schools with more contemporary approaches such as social constructivism and new social movements theory. Together, they recognise a couple of things. First, culture is not the determining structure it was once theorised to be. The shift in understanding subcultural groups as rooted in ascribed characteristics—being naturally different due to class, ethnicity, age, or to location (Park; Cohen; Clarke et al.)—to one in which subcultures are intentional articulations created by people, highlights the agency of individuals and groups to create culture. The break with realist/objectivist notions of culture offers promising opportunities for understanding resistance and opposition more generally. Second, the “counter” continues to be relevant in the study of subcultures. Subcultural participation these days is characterised as much or more by non-normativity than by marginalisation. As such, subcultures represent intentional protests against something outside themselves. Of course, we do not mean to suggest this is always and everywhere the case. Subcultural homogeneity was never really real, and concepts like “the mainstream” and “dominant culture” on the one hand, and “counterculture” and “opposition” on the other, are dialectically constructed. The “sub” in subculture refers both to a subset of meanings within a larger parent or mainstream culture (meanings which are unproblematic within the subculture) and to a set of meanings that explicitly rejects that which they oppose (E. Hannerz). In this regard, “sub” and “counter” can come together in new analyses of opposition, whether in terms of symbols (as cultural) or actions (as social). References Arnold, David O., ed. The Sociology of Subcultures. Berkeley, CA: Glendessary P, 1970. Arthur, Damien, and Claire Sherman. “Status within a Consumption-Oriented Counterculture: An Ethnographic Investigation of the Australian Hip Hop Culture.” Advances in Consumer Research 37 (2010): 386-392. Bae, Michelle S., and Olga Ivanshkevich. “If We Can’t Talk about This, We’ll Talk about Something Else: Shifting Issues to Keep the Counter-Discourse Alive.” Girls, Cultural Productions, and Resistance. Eds. Michelle S. Bae and Olga Ivanshkevich New York: Peter Lang, 2012. 65-80. Becker, Howard S. Outsiders: Studies in the Sociology of Deviance. New York: Free Press, 1963. Bennett, Andy. “Subcultures or Neo-Tribes? Rethinking the Relationship between Youth, Style, and Musical Taste.” Sociology 33.3 (1999): 599-617. ---. Popular Music and Youth Culture: Music, Identity, and Place. New York: Palgrave, 2000. Blackman, Shane J. Youth: Positions and Oppositions—Style, Sexuality, and Schooling. Aldershot, UK: Avebury, 1995. Buckingham, David. “Selling Youth: The Paradoxical Empowerment of the Young Consumer.” Youth Cultures in the Age of Global Media. Eds. David Buckingham, Sara Bragg, and Mary Jane Kehily. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014. 202-221. Clarke, Gary. “Defending Ski-Jumpers: A Critique of Theories of Youth Subcultures.” On Record: Rock, Pop, and the Written Word. Eds. Simon Frith and Andrew Goodwin. London: Routledge, 1990. 68-80. Clarke, John, Stuart Hall, Tony Jefferson, and Brian Roberts. “Subcultures, Cultures, and Class.” Resistance through Rituals. Eds. Stuart Hall and Tony Jefferson. London: Routledge, 1976. 9-74. Cohen, Albert. Delinquent Boys: The Culture of the Gang. New York: Free Press, 1955. Copes, Heith, and J. Patrick Williams. “Techniques of Affirmation: Deviant Behavior, Moral Commitment, and Subcultural Identity.” Deviant Behavior 28.2 (2007): 247-272. Cressey, Paul G. The Taxi-Dance Hall. New York: Greenwood P, 1932. Cushman, Thomas. Notes From Underground: Rock Music Counterculture in Russia. New York: Albany State U of New York P, 1995. Fichter, Madigan. “Rock ’n’ Roll Nation: Counterculture and Dissent in Romania, 1965–1975.” Nationalities Papers 29.4 (2011): 567-585. Gelder, Ken. Subcultures: Cultural Histories and Social Practice. London: Routledge, 2007. Gelder, Ken and Sarah Thornton, eds. The Subcultures Reader. 2nd ed. London: Routledge, 2005. George, Paul S., and Jerold M. Starr. “Beat Politics: New Left and Hippie Beginnings in the Postwar Counterculture." Cultural Politics: Radical Movements in Modern History. Eds. Jerold M. Starr and Lee A. McClung. New York: Praeger 1985. 189-234. Griffin, Christine. “‘What Time Is Now?’: Researching Youth and Culture beyond the ‘Birmingham School’.” Youth Cultures in the Age of Global Media. Eds. David Buckingham, Sara Bragg, and Mary Jane Kehily. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012. 21-36. Haenfler, Ross, Brett Johnson, and Ellis Jones. “Lifestyle Movements: Exploring the Intersection of Lifestyle and Social Movements.” Social Movement Studies: Journal of Social, Cultural and Political Protest 11.1 (2012):1-20. Hall, Stuart, and Tony Jefferson, eds. Resistance through Rituals. London: Routledge, 1976. Hannerz, Erik. Performing Punk: Subcultural Authentications and the Positioning of the Mainstream. Ph.D. Thesis, Uppsala: Uppsala U, 2013. Hannerz, Ulf. Cultural Complexity: Studies in the Social Organization of Meaning. New York: Columbia UP, 1992. Hebdige. Dick. Subculture: The Meaning of Style. London: Methuen, 1979. Huq, Rupa. Beyond Subculture. Pop, Youth and Identity in a Postcolonial World. London: Routledge, 2006. Johansson, Thomas, and Philip Lalander. "Doing Resistance: Youth and Changing Theories of Resistance." Journal of Youth Studies 15.8 (2012): 1078-1088. Kolind, Torsten. “Young People, Drinking and Social Class. Mainstream and Counterculture in the Everyday Practice of Danish Adolescents.” Journal of Youth Studies 14.3 (2011): 295-314. Leary, Timothy. Flashbacks. New York: Penguin, 1983. Mauss, Armand L. “Sociological Perspectives on the Mormon Subculture.” Annual Review of Sociology 10 (1984): 437-460. McRobbie, Angela. “Settling Accounts with Subcultures: A Feminist Critique.” Screen Education 34 (1980): 37-49. Merton, Robert. “Social Structure and Anomie.” American Sociological Review 3.5 (1938): 672-682. Muggleton, David. Inside Subculture: The Postmodern Meaning of Style. Oxford: Berg, 2000. Muggleton, David, and Rupert Weinzierl, eds. The Post-Subcultures Reader Oxford: Berg, 2003. Mungham, Geoff, and Geoff Pearson, eds. Working Class Youth Culture. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1976. Musgrove, Frank. Ecstasy and Holiness. Counter Culture and the Open Society. London: Methuen, 1974. Park, Robert E. 1915. “The City: Suggestions for the Investigation of Human Behavior in the City Environment.” American Journal of Sociology, 20.5 (1915): 577-612. Pichardo, Nelson A. “New Social Movements: A Critical Review.” Annual Review of Sociology 23 (1997): 411-430. Pilkington, Hilary. 2014. “‘My Whole Life Is Here:’ Tracing Journeys through Skinhead.” Youth Cultures in the Age of Global Media. Eds. David Buckingham, Sara Bragg, and Mary Jane Kehily. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan, 2014. 71-87. Raby, Rebecca. “What Is Resistance?” Journal of Youth Studies 8.2 (2005): 151-171. Redhead, Steve, ed. The Clubcultures Reader: Readings in Popular Cultural Studies. Oxford: Blackwell, 1997. ---. Subcultures to Clubcultures: An Introduction to Popular Cultural Studies. Oxford: Blackwell, 1997. Roszak, Theodore. The Making of a Counter Culture. Reflections on the Technocratic Society and its Youthful Opposition. New York: Anchor Books, 1969. St John, Graham. Technomad: Global Raving Countercultures. Oakville: Equinox, 2009. Thornton, Sarah. Club Cultures: Music, Media and Subcultural Capital. Cambridge: Polity, 1995 Thrasher, Frederic. The Gang: A Study of 1,313 Gangs in Chicago. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1927. Tuck, Eve, and K. Wayne Yang, eds. Youth Resistance Research and Theories of Change. New York: Routledge, 2014. Whyte, William Foote. Street Corner Society: The Social Structure of an Italian Slum. Chicago: U of Chicago P, 1943. Williams, J. Patrick. 2007. “Youth Subcultural Studies: Sociological Traditions and Core Concepts.” Sociology Compass 1.2 (2007): 572-593. ---. “The Multidimensionality of Resistance in Youth-Subcultural Studies.” Resistance Studies Magazine 2.1 (2009): 20-33. ---. Subcultural Theory: Traditions and Concepts. Cambridge, UK: Polity P, 2011 Yinger, J. Milton. “Contraculture and Subculture.” American Sociological Review 25.5 (1960): 625-635. ---. Countercultures: The Promise and Peril of a World Turned Upside Down. New York: Free Press, 1982.

Ecology has emerged as one of the most important sites of political struggle today. This issue of M/C invited authors to engage with “ecology” not as a siloised field of scientific enquiry, but rather as a way of contemporary thinking and a conceptual mode that emphasizes connectivity, conviviality, and inter-dependence. Proposing a radical revision of anthropocentrism in When Species Meet, Donna Haraway emphasises the dynamism of ecology as an entangled mesh, observing that, “the world is a knot in motion.” The “infolding” of human bodies with what we call “the environment” has never been clearer than the present moment—a time where humans may have undermined the viability of their own and other organism’s life on Earth. This impending ecological crisis has forced awareness of humanity’s dependence on the nonhuman lives that surround and envelop us. Gregory Bateson reminds us of the gravity of this mutuality with his assertion that the unit of survival is the organism-and-its-environment in a relationship, and that an organism which destroys its environment commits suicide (Bateson). Our unstable ecological future has prompted the emergence of an array of inter-disciplines, and new political, intellectual and cultural alignments including; ecomedia, eco-Marxism, ecological humanities, political ecology and animal studies. These thriving areas of scholarship often attempt to situate, “humans in ecological terms and non-humans in ethical terms,” while highlighting, as Val Plumwood has in her landmark Environmental Culture: The Ecological Crisis of Reason, how, “anthropocentric perspectives and culture […] make us insensitive to our ecological place in the world’ (2). Despite the growing popular concern for the more-than-human world, Western populations are “citizens of science-led modernity, and are still investing in the narratives of progress” (Myerson 61). Climate change and the contemporary ecological crisis have provided an impetus and opportunity for collaborative scholarship and alternative engagements across the science/humanities divide. Deborah Bird Rose and Libby Robin remind us that the driving forces behind crises are primarily social and cultural. It is therefore essential for media and cultural theorists to be part of the ecological conversation as it seeks to develop new knowledge practices in order to “engage with connectivity and commitment in a time of crisis and concern” (Rose and Robin). Since James Lovelock proposed the Gaia hypothesis in 1982, conceptualising the Earth as a self-regulating, evolving system, notions of equilibrium and harmony have pervaded ecological thinking. Gaia is “a powerfully productive scientific metaphor and has considerable value as a way to imagine the planet as at once vulnerable and vast, enduring and evolving” (Garrard 201). Because the study of ecology concerns life and the complex contingencies of all of its relationships, applying ecological thought to contemporary “matters of concern” (Latour) can alert us to the limitations of our knowledge, while simultaneously impelling us to act from our enmeshed position in a precariously balanced world. At the same time, as our Feature for this issue recognises, ecological metaphors can paradoxically damage ecologies. Evidently the theme of ecology has contemporary resonance as we were both excited and overwhelmed with the sheer number (over 20) of papers we received and their theoretical diversity, and we regret that we could not include more than those that follow. Our sincere gratitude goes to our generous referees—all 54 of them. And a special thanks to our colleagues (in Macquarie University’s Department of Media, Music, Communication and Cultural Studies, and Environment and Geography) who we relied upon when reviewers fell through. If we then include the efforts of all our contributors, as well as M/C editors Peta Mitchell and Axel Bruns, this issue is the culmination of the collaborative (and mostly invisible) labour of around 89 people. Thank you. Invisible labour is one focus of Richard Maxwell and Toby Miller’s feature article for this issue, “The Real Future of the Media.” It is both an eco-Marxist critique of the media industries and a call to action for all media, communications and cultural studies scholars to place ecological issues at the core of their work. Far from the “end of materiality” promised by virtual media’s technological utopia, Maxwell and Miller demonstrate the ways in which the media industries and technophiles alike, tend to obscure not only inequitable and dangerous labour conditions but also the media’s negative environmental impacts. With some staggering statistics around ICT/CE planned obsolescence, E-waste, exposure of workers to toxicity, they emphasise that ecological metaphors more often blind us to harsh environmental realities, rather than illuminate them. By focusing on the not-so-green outcomes of contemporary media practice, they remind us that while ecology can be a useful conceptual mode, it is important to avoid divorcing metaphor from materiality, lest we confuse the map with the territory (Alfred Korzybski). In a similar political vein, in “Gentrifying Climate Change: Ecological Modernisation and the Cultural Politics of Definition”, Ben Glasson remains sceptical that our current political and economic system can adequately address the challenges that climate change will bring. Focused on the shortcomings of the discourse of ecological modernisation (EM), Glasson argues that environmentalism, rather than being integrated into capitalism, has been co-opted, through a process of gentrification, without necessarily, any tangible environmental benefits. The next two articles explore filmic portrayals of ecological disaster. Described by one referee as a “breath of fresh air in the field of post-apocalyptic criticism,” Tim Matts’s and Aidan Tynan’s timely piece places Lars von Trier’s recent film Melancholia, in the broader context of humanity’s sense of impending annihilation. Instead of mourning for the loss of Earth, the authors suggest that Melancholia’s central character’s overwhelming melancholy enables a “radical form of ecological openness.” While in “Spectre of the Past, Vision of the Future,” Tamas Molnar celebrates filmmaker Arthus-Bertrand’s Home as a climate change communication text which uses ritual to influence audience’s environmental behaviour. Molnar argues that Home transforms anthropocentric hubris into ecological awareness, as the film’s spectators begin to reconcile the spectral haunting of human-induced environmental devastation with a future vision of personal responsibility and hope for the suffering body of the Earth. Anita Howarth focuses on another suffering body to explore the convergence of two ecologies which combine to form an “ecology of protest” in “A Hunger Strike-the Ecology of a Protest: The Case of Bahraini activist Abdulhadi al-Khawaja.” Howarth argues that through an act of corporeal-environmental (self)destruction, the emaciated body of Bahraini hunger striker Abdulhadi al-Khawaja was transformed into a political spectacle by a global media ecology. Howarth explores how the interpenetration between the ecology of the organism-and-its-environment, and the ecology of a global media system, impacts on protest movements and social justice. The erasure of the rabbit’s suffering body becomes Katherine Wright’s focus in “Bunnies, Bilbies, and the Ethic of Ecological Remembrance” where she ponders the more sinister dimensions of substituting the Easter bunny with the Easter bilby. Analysing how stories impact on ecological thinking and attitudes, Wright critiques the problematic native/invasive dichotomy that sees the native bilby valued over the invasive rabbit; slaughtered in vast numbers in Australia. In place of this binary she proposes an ethic of “ecological remembrance,” which recognises the importance of memory in sustaining an ethics of more-than-human ecological care. The following two articles emphasise the importance of storytelling to develop Indigenous ecological understanding and a decolonising ethic. With a focus on Australian Aboriginal story ecology, “Growing up the Future: Children’s Stories and Aboriginal Ecology,” Blaze Kwaymullina et al. explore two works of children’s literature which emphasise the sentience of Country and the responsibilities of future generations to protect fragile ecologies. They argue that through story, children will learn to “enhance the pattern of life,” rather than destroy it. While in “Ecology, Ontology and Pedagogy at Camp Coorong,” Bindi MacGill et al. traverse another pedagogy of Indigenous storytelling which has developed at Camp Coorong: Race Relations and Cultural Education Centre 200km south of Adelaide. An initiative of Ngarrindjeri Regional Authority, Camp Coorong is a site of place-based education which passes on ethics of caring for country to students in the Murray-Darling Basin. Through the “gift of story” Camp Coorong has become a site of active decolonisation as non-Indigenous students and teachers are able to hear stories of Aboriginal dispossession, survival, and resilience. By creating a, “pedagogy of discomfort,” Camp Coorong encourages ecological responsibility and commitment, while engaging in the vital task of decolonising Australian culture and environments. Applying the ecological framework to a very different form of storytelling, Paul Makeham, Bree Hadley and Joon-Yee Kwok discuss what “ecological thinking” can offer studies of the performing arts sector in Brisbane, Australia. Through a case study of Aus-e-stage Mapping Service, an online application that maps data about performing arts practitioners, organisations and audiences, “A ‘Value Ecology’ Approach to the Performing Arts” demonstrates the benefits of ecologically grounded rhizomatic thinking in assessing a theatre industry’s “health” through relationships and flows. Grounded in the theory of French philosopher Michel Serres, Timothy Barker’s, “Information and Atmospheres: Exploring the Relationship between the Natural Environment and Information Aesthetics” is a thoughtful exploration of the way an array of artworks forges connections between “nature” and information. Through information visualisation and sonification, all three examples give a new sense of materiality to the atmosphere, with EcoArtTech appearing as our cover image for this issue. This journal edition is populated by papers which explore different niches in ecological thinking, that are perhaps best understood in Latourian terms as an assemblage. The broad scope covered in the following papers demonstrates that ecology is an unsettled concept, made fertile by instability and excess. This issue of M/C hovers in the borderlands of inter-disciplinarity, where creative verve thrives in contact zones. We hope you enjoy it! References Bateson, Gregory. Steps to an Ecology of Mind. London: Paladin, Granada Publishing, 1973. Garrard, Greg. Ecocriticism. Oxon and New York: Routledge, 2012. Haraway, Donna. When Species Meet. London: University of Minneapolis Press, 2007. (Kindle edition) Latour, Bruno. “Why Has Critique Run Out of Steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern.” Critical Inquiry 30.2 (2004). 27 June 2012 ‹http://criticalinquiry.uchicago.edu/issues/v30/30n2.Latour.html›. Lovelock, James. Gaia: A New Look at Life on Earth. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1982. Moreton, Timothy. Ecology without Nature. Harvard: Harvard University Press, 2007. Myerson, George. Ecology and the End of Postmodernity. London: Icon Books, 2002. Plumwood, Val. Environmental Culture: The Ecological Crisis of Reason. Routledge; London and New York, 2002. Rose, Deborah Bird, and Libby Robin. “The Ecological Humanities in Action.” Australian Humanities Review 31-32. (April 2004). 27 June 2012

06–20Abbott, Chris (King's College, U London, UK) & Alim Shaikh, Visual representation in the digital age: Issues arising from a case study of digital media use and representation by pupils in multicultural school settings. Language and Education (Multilingual Matters) 19.6 (2005), 455–466.06–21Andreou, Georgia & Napoleon Mitsis (U Thessaly, Greece), Greek as a foreign language for speakers of Arabic: A study of medical students at the University of Thessaly. Language, Culture and Curriculum (Multilingual Matters) 18.2 (2005), 181–187.06–22Aune, R. Kelly (U Hawaii at Manoa, USA; kaune@hawaii.edu), Timothy R. Levine, Hee Sun Park, Kelli Jean K. Asada & John A. Banas, Tests of a theory of communicative responsibility. Journal of Language and Social Psychology (Sage) 24.4 (2005), 358–381.06–23Belz, Julie A. (The Pennsylvania State U, USA; jab63@psu.edu) & Nina Vyatkina, Learner corpus analysis and the development of L2 pragmatic competence in networked intercultural language study: The case of German modal particles. The Canadian Modern Language Review (University of Toronto Press) 62.1 (2005), 17–48.06–24Bird, Stephen (U Brunei Darussalam, Brunei; sbird@fass.ubd.edu.bn), Language learning edutainment: Mixing motives in digital resources. RELC Journal (Sage) 36.3 (2005), 311–339.06–25Carrington, Victoria (U Plymouth, UK), The uncanny, digital texts and literacy. Language and Education (Multilingual Matters) 19.6 (2005), 467–482.06–26Chung, Yang-Gyun (International Languages Program, Ottawa, Canada; jchung2536@rogers.com), Barbara Graves, Mari Wesche & Marion Barfurth, Computer-mediated communication in Korean–English chat rooms: Tandem learning in an international languages program. The Canadian Modern Language Review (University of Toronto Press) 62.1 (2005), 49–86.06–27Clopper, Cynthia G. & David B. Pisoni, Effects of talker variability on perceptual learning of dialects, Language and Speech (Kingston Press) 47.3 (2004), 207–239.06–28Csizér, Kata (Eötvös U, Budapest, Hungary; weinkata@yahoo.com) & Zoltán Dörnyei, Language learners' motivational profiles and their motivated learning behavior. Language Learning (Blackwell) 55.4 (2005), 613–659.06–29Davis, Adrian (Macao Polytechnic Institute, Macao, China; ajdavis@ipm.edu.mo), Teachers' and students' beliefs regarding aspects of language learning. Evaluation and Research in Education (Multilingual Matters) 17.4 (2003), 207–222.06–30Deterding, David (Nanyang Technological U, Singapore; dhdeter@nie.edu.sg), Listening to Estuary English in Singapore. TESOL Quarterly (Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages) 39.3 (2005), 425–440.06–31Dörnyei, Zoltán (U Nottingham, UK; zoltan.dornyei@nottingham.ac.uk) & Kata Csizér, The effects of intercultural contact and tourism on language attitudes and language learning motivation. Journal of Language and Social Psychology (Sage) 24.4 (2005), 327–357.06–32Enk, Anneke van (Simon Fraser U, Burnaby, Canada), Diane Dagenais & Kelleen Toohey, A socio-cultural perspective on school-based literacy research: Some emerging considerations. Language and Education (Multilingual Matters) 19.6 (2005), 496–512.06–33Foster, Pauline & Amy Snyder Ohta (St Mary's College, U London, UK), Negotiation for meaning and peer assistance in second language classrooms. Applied Linguistics (Oxford University Press) 26.3 (2005), 402–430.06–34Furmanovsky, Michael (Ryukoku U, Japan), Japanese students' reflections on a short-term language program. The Language Teacher (Japan Association for Language Teaching) 29.12 (2005), 3–9.06–35Gass, Susan (Michigan State U, USA; gass@msu.edu), Alison Mackey & Lauren Ross-Feldman, Task-based interactions in classroom and laboratory settings. Language Learning (Blackwell) 55.4 (2005), 575–611.06–36Gatbonton, Elizabeth, Pavel Trofimovich & Michael Magid (Concordia U, USA), Learners' ethnic group affiliation and L2 pronunciation accuracy: A sociolinguistic investigation. TESOL Quarterly (Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages) 39.3 (2005), 489–512.06–37Gerjets, Peter & Friedrich Hesse (Knowledge Media Research Center, Germany; p.gerjets@iwm-kmrc.de), When are powerful learning environments effective? The role of learner activities and of students' conceptions of educational technology. International Journal of Educational Research (Elsevier) 41.6 (2004), 445–465.06–38Golombek, Paula & Stefanie Jordan (The Pennsylvania State U, USA), Becoming ‘black lambs’ not ‘parrots’: A poststructuralist orientation to intelligibility and identity. TESOL Quarterly (Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages) 39.3 (2005), 513–534.06–39Green, Christopher (Hong Kong Polytechnic U, Hong Kong, China; egchrisg@polyu.edu.hk), Integrating extensive reading in the task-based curriculum. ELT Journal (Oxford University Press) 59.4 (2005), 306–311.06–40Hardison, Debra M. (Michigan State U, USA; hardiso2@msu.edu), Second-language spoken word identification: Effects of perceptual training, visual cues, and phonetic environment. Applied Psycholinguistics (Cambridge University Press) 26.4 (2005), 579–596.06–41Harwood, Nigel (U Essex, UK; nharwood@essex.ac.uk), ‘We do not seem to have a theory … the theory I present here attempts to fill this gap’: Inclusive and exclusive pronouns in academic writing. Applied Linguistics (Oxford University Press) 26.3 (2005), 343–375.06–42Hauser, Eric (U Electro-Communications, Japan), Coding ‘corrective recasts’: The maintenance of meaning and more fundamental problems. Applied Linguistics (Oxford University Press) 26.3 (2005), 293–316.06–43Kondo-Brown, Kimi (U Hawaii at Manoa, USA; kondo@hawaii.edu), Differences in language skills: Heritage language learner subgroups and foreign language learners. The Modern Language Journal (Blackwell) 89.4 (2005), 563–581.06–44Koprowski, Mark (markkoprowski@yahoo.com), Investigating the usefulness of lexical phrases in contemporary coursebooks. ELT Journal (Oxford University Press) 59.4 (2005), 322–332.06–45LaFrance, Adéle (U Toronto, Canada; alafrance@oise.utoronto.ca) & Alexandra Gottardo, A longitudinal study of phonological processing skills and reading in bilingual children. Applied Psycholinguistics (Cambridge University Press) 26.4 (2005), 559–578.06–46Nassaji, Hossein (U Victoria, Canada), Input modality and remembering name-referent associations in vocabulary learning. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics (Canadian Association of Applied Linguistics) 7.1 (2004), 39–55.06–47Nguyen, Hanh Thi (Hawaii Pacific U, USA; htnguyen@hawaii.edu) & Guy Kellogg, Emergent identities in on-line discussions for second language learning. The Canadian Modern Language Review (University of Toronto Press) 62.1 (2005), 111–136.06–48Norton, Julie (U Leicester, UK; jen7@le.ac.uk), The paired format in the Cambridge Speaking Tests. ELT Journal (Oxford University Press) 59.4 (2005), 287–297.06–49North, Sarah (The Open U, UK), Disciplinary variation in the use of theme in undergraduate essays. Applied Linguistics (Oxford University Press) 26.3 (2005), 431–452.06–50Nunan, David (U Hong Kong, China), Styles and strategies in the language classroom. The Language Teacher (Japan Association for Language Teaching) 29.6 (2005), 9–11.06–51Paribakht, T. Sima (U Ottawa, Canada; paribakh@uottawa.ca), The influence of first language lexicalization on second language lexical inferencing: A study of Farsi-speaking learners of English as a foreign language. Language Learning (Blackwell) 55.4 (2005), 701–748.06–52Potts, Diana (U British Columbia, Canada; djpotts7@hotmail.com), Pedagogy, purpose, and the second language learner in on-line communities. The Canadian Modern Language Review (University of Toronto Press) 62.1 (2005), 137–160.06–53Pretorius, Elizabeth J. (U South Africa, Pretoria, South Africa; pretoej@unisa.ac.za), English as a second language learner differences in anaphoric resolution: Reading to learn in the academic context. Applied Psycholinguistics (Cambridge University Press) 26.4 (2005), 521–539.06–54Ramírez Verdugo, Dolores (Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Spain; dolores.ramirez@uam.es), The nature and patterning of native and non-native intonation in the expression of certainty and uncertainty: Pragmatic effects. Journal of Pragmatics (Elsevier) 37.12 (2005), 2086–2115.06–55Riney, Timothy J., Naoyuki Takagi & Kumiko Inutsu (Interntional Christian U, Japan), Phonetic parameters and perceptual judgments of accent in English by American and Japanese listeners. TESOL Quarterly (Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages) 39.3 (2005), 441–466.06–56Rossiter, Marian J. (U Alberta, Canada), Developmental sequences of L2 communication strategies. Applied Language Learning (Defense Language Institute Foreign Language Center and Presidio of Monterey, USA) 15.1 & 15.2 (2005), 55–66.06–57Rubdy, Rani (Nanyang Technological U, Singapore; rsrubdy@nie.edu.sg), A multi-thrust approach to fostering a research culture. ELT Journal (Oxford University Press) 59.4 (2005), 277–286.06–58Schneider, Jason (jasoncschneider@yahoo.com), Teaching grammar through community issues. ELT Journal (Oxford University Press) 59.4 (2005), 298–305.06–59Shaaban, Kassim (American U Beirut, Lebanon), A proposed framework for incorporating moral education into the ESL/EFL classroom. Language, Culture and Curriculum (Multilingual Matters) 18.2 (2005), 201–217.06–60Sider, Steve R. (U Western Ontario, Canada), Growing up overseas: Perceptions of second language attrition and retrieval amongst expatriate children in India. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics (Canadian Association of Applied Linguistics) 7.2 (2004), 117–138.06–61Spiliotopoulus, Valia (U Toronto, Canada; valia.spiliotopoulos@ubc.ca) & Stephen Carey, Investigating the role of identity in writing using electronic bulletin boards. The Canadian Modern Language Review (University of Toronto Press) 62.1 (2005), 87–109.06–62Sueyoshi, Ayano (Michigan State U, USA; hardiso2@msu.edu) & Debra M. Hardison, The role of gestures and facial cues in second language listening comprehension. Language Learning (Blackwell) 55.4 (2005), 661–699.06–63Taguchi, Naoko (Carnegie Mellon U, USA; taguchi@andrew.cmu.edu), Comprehending implied meaning in English as a foreign language. The Modern Language Journal (Blackwell) 89.4 (2005), 543–562.06–64Taillefer, Gail F. (Université Toulouse I Sciences Sociales, France; gail.taillefer@univ-tlse1.fr), Foreign language reading and study abroad: Cross-cultural and cross-linguistic questions. The Modern Language Journal (Blackwell) 89.4 (2005), 503–528.06–65Tani-Fukuchi, Naoko (Kwansei Gakuin U, Japan), Japanese learner psychology and assessment of affect in foreign language study. The Language Teacher (Japan Association for Language Teaching) 29.4 (2005), 3–9.06–66Tani-Fukuchi, Naoko (Kwansei Gakuin U, Hyogo, Japan) & Robin Sakamoto, Affective dimensions of the Japanese foreign language learner: Implications for psychological learner development in Japan. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development (Multilingual Matters) 26.4 (2005), 333–350.06–67Thoms, Joshua (U Iowa, USA; joshua_thomas@uiowa.edu), Jianling Liao & Anja Szustak, The use of L1 in an L2 on-line chat activity. The Canadian Modern Language Review (University of Toronto Press) 62.1 (2005), 161–182.06–68Tickoo, Asha (Southern Illinois U, USA; atickoo@siue.edu), The selective marking of past tense: Insights from Indian learners of English. International Journal of Applied Linguistics (Blackwell) 15.3 (2005), 364–378.06–69Tocalli-Beller, Agustina & Merrill Swain (U Toronto, Canada; atocalli-beller@oise.utoronto.ca), Reformulation: The cognitive conflict and L2 learning it generates. International Journal of Applied Linguistics (Blackwell) 15.1 (2005), 5–28.06–70Trofimovich, Pavel (Concordia U, Quebec, Canada; pavel@education.concordia.ca), Spoken-word processing in native and second languages: An investigation of auditory word priming. Applied Psycholinguistics (Cambridge University Press) 26.4 (2005), 479–504.06–71Tuveng, Elena (U Oslo, Norway) & Astri Heen Wold, The collaboration of teacher and language-minority children in masking comprehension problems in the language of instruction: A case study in an urban Norwegian school. Language and Education (Multilingual Matters) 19.6 (2005), 513–536.06–72Warga, Muriel (Karl Franzens U, Graz, Austria), ‘Je serais très merciable’: Formulaic vs. creatively produced speech in learners' request closings. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics (Canadian Association of Applied Linguistics) 8.1 (2005), 67–94.

”A remark you made” is the title of a wonderful tune by the famous jazz-rock group “Weather Report”, issued on the influential “Heavy weather” LP some 30 years ago. In an age where planning and rationalizing is the main issue in most contexts, whether it’s a matter of studying, teaching, doing research or using a diet, “A remark you made” is a symbol of attending to the unplanned, unforeseen and often, unwanted. In most accounts on cognitive development one is overtly focused on the manageable, on the predictable and expected, and not so attentive to the opposite. “A remark you made” makes us think again and reconsider what might be of value, in what we otherwise might neglect. A remark made by Terry Anderson at a conference last year (2006) was rather telling. Anderson is the renown distance educator from Athabasca University, Alberta Canada, and editor of our fellow e-journal “The International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning”. I recite it here totally from my own memory, and I have never approached him to have it verified, falsified or commented. That doesn’t matter in this context. Standing on the podium, he lowered his voice and asked if any Danes were present in the room. There weren’t! Then he explained that his argument might be presented differently with Danes present: “You see – Danes seem to think that learning alone is no longer possible!” That remark caused quite a good laugh, not the least because any comment – good or bad – about fellow Scandinavians generally is considered to be a good joke. But it was also a comment on how not only distance education, or open and flexible learning, but learning theory in general is driven by the sociocultural learning theory, - and according to Anderson, particularly so in Denmark! Our first contribution in this issue is about the theory of media theory developed by one of our editors: Lars Qvortrup. Lars is now the rector of the Danish “Royal School of Library and Information Science”. His presentation rests on an understanding of learning that makes it totally an individual experience, namely radical constructivism, as presented by Niklas Luhmann. In Denmark it would be fair to say that constructivism and social constructivism are two vital, but different approaches to learning, and in distance education in particular. In most other contexts nowadays, ideas about dialogues, scaffolding, collaboration, and mentoring relies on the theoretical tradition from Lev Vygotsky, via several contemporary interpretations and developments performed by J. Wertsch, J. Lave, R. Scardamalia, E.Wenger etc. Since Timothy Koschmann placed the development of educational psychology to fit with an evolutionary scheme, he unavoidably suggested a normative taxonomy, in which learning in a social context was placed at the top, and behaviourism at the bottom. This has led to a normative regime in higher education and elsewhere in which learning through working in social contexts, such as in seminars, groups and projects has gained a superior position. The paradox is that learning in this way is, for the most part, not very flexible. On the contrary, the more you add assignments that demand contributions and collaboration from more than one person, the less flexible it gets. How do we then come to terms with the paradox? In practice, the average design of a distance education programme allows students to work in flexible manners, which opens for collaborative work for those who prefer to work collaboratively, and a straightforward independent course progression for what usually is the majority: students working for themselves. In a recently published PhD thesis by dr.Ulf Olsson of Karlstad University, he demonstrates that working independently, not relying on social activity in the virtual classroom, pays off in order to survive in the distance education classroom (Olsson 2007). Therefore it seems that holding learning in the social context as a moral predicament has some serious consequences. First, it devalues personal knowledge, and explains how individuals learn poorly. Second, it builds on a sort of normality, or even moralism that dismisses the learning strategies that are based on individual achievement. Since adult education was founded gradually as an academic field, individual and collective learning has been taken seriously as a question of variance, of adapting to different learning styles and contexts. Making the social contexts of learning the superior is out of line with a policy for flexible learning anyhow. Joakim Samuelson's article in this journal reveals a closer look at what happens when classrooms are dominated by computers. Even if computers in the classroom have been expected to promote communication and dialogic exchanges of knowledge, Samuelson demonstrates in the case he reports from that this is hardly the case. Students prefer to work alone, also in primary grades. Stephen Dobson and Rune Sarroma Haustätter tell a fascinating story in their paper about how the Internet changes educational knowledge. Their frame of reference is not the classroom, but public debate. Initially Dobson, Brudal and Tobiassen published an article about a particular tradition in Norway. Students finishing their thirteen-year long junior and secondary education celebrate this by partying and performing a collective masquerade for two weeks, in a manner that has caused parents and teachers much concern over the years. Dobson et.al. interpreted this ritual differently, finding it to be a rite-de-passage with serious care-taking and gentle socialisation into a new and different position as independent students. Gradually this "new knowledge" generated by educational researchers became one of the hottest topics in the public debate. Dobson and Hausstätter discuss how this knowledge is interpreted and codified according to the schemes of the sociology of education. Finally in this issue AnnBritt Enochson presents her findings from a study she made on how tweens - children between 11 and thirteen - address each other on a very busy Swedish site for children: LunarStorm. While most attention is given in the media to the misuse of the Internet, this report suggests that in the vast majority of instances, kids address each other in a polite and inviting manner. In the casual context, communicating is a necessary and enjoyable exercise for kids. Reframing communication in the context of schooling separates communication for social purposes and for subject matters. The dream of social constructivism is that the two modes of communication merge. In many instances that is a process of chasing rainbows. As the editor writes these lines, international media reports that the composer of “A remark you made”, Joe Zawinul just died (Sep.12.2007). We thank him for the musical remarks he made for us all. Literature: Dobson, S, Brudalen, R. and Tobiassen, H. (2006) Courting risk. The attempt to understand youth cultures. Young Vol. 14, No.1 (49-59) Koschmann, T. (1996). Paradigmshifts and instructional technology: An introduction. I T. Koschmann (red.), CSCL: Theory and Practice of an Emerging Paradigm. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Olsson, U. (2007) Flexibel utbildning. För vem? [Flexible education. For whom?] PhD dissertation. Karlstad University, Karlstad.

We take as our subject what many would deem a waste of good celluloid: the degraded cultural form of the stoner film. Stoner films plot the experiences of the wasted (those intoxicated on marijuana) as they exhibit wastefulness—excessiveness, improvidence, decay—on a number of fronts. Stoners waste time in constantly hunting for pot and in failing to pursue more productive activity whilst wasted. Stoners waste their minds, both literally, if we believe contested studies that indicate marijuana smoking kills brains cells, and figuratively, in rendering themselves cognitively impaired. Stoners waste their bodies through the dangerous practice of smoking and through the tendency toward physical inertia. Stoners waste money on marijuana firstly, but also on such sophomoric accoutrements as the stoner film itself. Stoners lay waste to convention in excessively seeking pleasure and in dressing and acting outrageously. And stoners, if the scatological humour of so many stoner films is any index, are preoccupied with bodily waste. Stoners, we argue here, waste whiteness as well. As the likes of Jesse and Chester (Dude, Where’s My Car?), Wayne and Garth (Wayne’s World), Bill and Ted (Bill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure) and Jay and Silent Bob (Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back) make clear, whiteness looms large in stoner films. Yet the genre, we argue, disavows its own whiteness, in favour of a post-white hybridity that lavishly squanders white privilege. For all its focus on whiteness, filmic wastedness has always been an ethnically diverse and ambiguous category. The genre’s origins in the work of Cheech Marin, a Chicano, and Tommy Chong, a Chinese-European Canadian, have been buttressed in this regard by many African American contributions to the stoner oeuvre, including How High, Half Baked and Friday, as well as by Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle, and its Korean-American and Indian-American protagonists. Cheech and Chong initiated the genre with the release of Up in Smoke in 1978. A host of films have followed featuring protagonists who spend much of their time smoking and seeking marijuana (or—in the case of stoner films such as Dude, Where’s My Car? released during the height of the War on Drugs—acting stoned without ever being seen to get stoned). Inspired in part by the 1938 anti-marijuana film Reefer Madness, and the unintended humour such propaganda films begat amongst marijuana smokers, stoner films are comedies that satirise both marijuana culture and its prohibition. Self-consciously slapstick, the stoner genre excludes more serious films about drugs, from Easy Rider to Shaft, as well as films such as The Wizard of Oz, Yellow Submarine, the Muppet movies, and others popular amongst marijuana smokers because of surreal content. Likewise, a host of films that include secondary stoner characters, such as Jeff Spicoli in Fast Times at Ridgemont High and Wooderson in Dazed and Confused, are commonly excluded from the genre on the grounds that the stoner film, first and foremost, celebrates stonerism, that is “serious commitment to smoking and acquiring marijuana as a lifestyle choice.” (Meltzer). Often taking the form of the “buddy film,” stoner flicks generally feature male leads and frequently exhibit a decidedly masculinist orientation, with women, for the most part reduced to little more than the object of the white male gaze.The plot, such as it is, of the typical stoner film concerns the search for marijuana (or an accessory, such as junk food) and the improbable misadventures that ensue. While frequently represented as resourceful and energetic in their quest for marijuana, filmic stoners otherwise exhibit ambivalent attitudes toward enterprise that involves significant effort. Typically represented as happy and peaceable, filmic stoners rarely engage in conflict beyond regular clashes with authority figures determined to enforce anti-drug laws, and other measures that stoners take to be infringements upon happiness. While Hollywood’s stoners thus share a sense of entitlement to pleasure, they do not otherwise exhibit a coherent ideological orthodoxy beyond a certain libertarian and relativistic open-mindedness. More likely to take inspiration from comic book heroes than Aldous Huxley or Timothy Leary, stoners are most often portrayed as ‘dazed and confused,’ and could be said to waste the intellectual tradition of mind expansion that Leary represents. That stoner films are, at times, misunderstood to be quintessentially white is hardly suprising. As a social construct that creates, maintains and legitimates white domination, whiteness manifests, as one of its most defining features, an ability to swallow up difference and to insist upon, at critical junctures, a universal subjectivity that disallows for difference (hooks 167). Such universalising not only sanctions co-optation of ethnic cultural expression, it also functions to mask whiteness’s existence, thus reinforcing its very power. Whiteness, as Richard Dyer argues, is simultaneously everywhere and nowhere. It obfuscates itself and its relationship to the particular traits it is said to embody—disinterest, prudence, temperance, rationality, bodily restraint, industriousness (3). Whiteness is thus constructed as neither an ethnic nor racial particularity, but rather the transcendence of such positionality (Wiegman 139). While non-whites are raced, to be white is to be “just human” and thus to possess the power to “claim to speak for the commonality of humanity” whilst denying the accrual of any particular racial privilege (Dyer 2). In refuting its own advantages—which are so wide ranging (from preferential treatment in housing loans, to the freedom to fail without fear of reflecting badly on other whites) that they are, like whiteness itself, both assumed and unproblematic—whiteness instantiates individualism, allowing whites to believe that their successes are in no way the outcome of systematic racial advantage, but rather the product of individual toil (McIntosh; Lipsitz). An examination of the 1978 stoner film Up in Smoke suggests that whatever the ethnic ambiguity of the figure of the stoner, the genre of the stoner film is all about the wasting of whiteness. Up in Smoke opens with two alternating domestic scenes. We first encounter Pedro De Pacas (Cheech Marin) in a cluttered and shadowy room as his siblings romp affectionately upon his back, waking him from his slumber on the couch. Pedro rises, stepping into a bowl of cereal on the floor. He stumbles to the bathroom, where, sleepy and disoriented, he urinates into the laundry hamper. The chaos of Pedro’s disrupted sleep is followed in the film by a more metaphoric awakening as Anthony Stoner (Tommy Chong) determines to leave home. The scene takes place in a far more orderly, light and lavish room. The space’s overpowering whiteness is breached only by the figure of Anthony and his unruly black hair, bushy black beard, and loud Hawaiian shirt, which vibrates with colour against the white walls, white furnishings and white curtains. We watch as Anthony, behind an elaborate bar, prepares a banana protein shake, impassively ignoring his parents, both clothed in all-white, as they clutch martini glasses and berate their son for his lack of ambition. Arnold Stoner [father]: Son, your mother and me would like for you to cozy up to the Finkelstein boy. He's a bright kid, and, uh... he's going to military school, and remember, he was an Eagle Scout. Tempest Stoner [mother]: Arnold…Arnold Stoner: [shouts over/to his wife] Will you shut up? We’re not going to have a family brawl!Tempest Stoner: [continues talking as her husband shouts]…. Retard.Arnold Stoner: [to Anthony] We've put up with a hell of a lot.[Anthony starts blender] Can this wait? ... Build your goddamn muscles, huh? You know, you could build your muscles picking strawberries.You know, bend and scoop... like the Mexicans. Shit, maybe I could get you a job with United Fruit. I got a buddy with United Fruit. ... Get you started. Start with strawberries, you might work your way up to these goddamn bananas! When, boy? When...are you going to get your act together?Anthony: [Burps]Tempest Stoner: Gross.Arnold Stoner: Oh, good God Almighty me. I think he's the Antichrist. Anthony, I want to talk to you. [Anthony gathers his smoothie supplements and begins to walk out of the room.] Now, listen! Don't walk away from me when I'm talking to you! You get a goddamn job before sundown, or we're shipping you off to military school with that goddamn Finkelstein shit kid! Son of a bitch!The whiteness of Anthony’s parents is signified so pervasively and so strikingly in this scene—in their improbable white outfits and in the room’s insufferably white décor—that we come to understand it as causative. The rage and racism of Mr. Stoner’s tirade, the scene suggests, is a product of whiteness itself. Given that whiteness achieves and maintains its domination via both ubiquity and invisibility, what Up in Smoke accomplishes in this scene is notable. Arnold Stoner’s tortured syntax (“that goddamn Finkelstein shit kid”) works to “mak[e] whiteness strange” (Dyer 4), while the scene’s exaggerated staging delineates whiteness as “a particular – even peculiar – identity, rather than a presumed norm” (Roediger, Colored White 21). The belligerence of the senior Stoners toward not only their son and each other, but the world at large, in turn, functions to render whiteness intrinsically ruthless and destructive. Anthony’s parents, in all their whiteness, enact David Roediger’s assertion that “it is not merely that ‘Whiteness’s is oppressive and false; it is that ‘Whiteness’s is nothing but oppressive and false” (Toward the Abolition 13).Anthony speaks not a word during the scene. He communicates only by belching and giving his parents the finger as he leaves the room and the home. This departure is significant in that it marks the moment when Anthony, hereafter known only as “Man,” flees the world of whiteness. He winds up taking refuge in the multi-hued world of stonerism, as embodied in the scene that follows, which features Pedro emerging from his home to interact with his Chicano neighbours and to lovingly inspect his car. As a lowrider, a customised vehicle that “begin[s] with the abandoned materials of one tradition (that of mainstream America), … [and is] … then transformed and recycled . . . into new and fresh objects of art which are distinctly Chicano,” Pedro’s car serves as a symbol of the cultural hybridisation that Man is about to undergo (quoted in Ondine 141).As Man’s muteness in the presence of his parents suggests, his racial status seems tentative from the start. Within the world of whiteness, Man is the subaltern, silenced and denigrated, finding voice only after he befriends Pedro. Even as the film identifies Man as white through his parental lineage, it renders indeterminate its own assertion, destabilising any such fixed or naturalised schema of identity. When Man is first introduced to Pedro’s band as their newest member, James, the band’s African American bass player, looks at Man, dressed in the uniform of the band, and asks: “Hey Pedro, where’s the white dude you said was playing the drums?” Clearly, from James’s point of view, the room contains no white dudes, just stoners. Man’s presumed whiteness becomes one of the film’s countless gags, the provocative ambiguity of the casting of a Chinese-European to play a white part underscored in the film by the equally implausible matter of age. Man, according to the film’s narrative, is a high school student; Chong was forty when the film was released. Like his age, Man’s whiteness is never a good fit. That Man ultimately winds up sleeping on the very couch upon which we first encounter Pedro suggests how radical and final the break with his dubious white past is. The “Mexicans” whom his father would mock as fit only for abject labour are amongst those whom Man comes to consider his closest companions. In departing his parents’ white world, and embracing Pedro’s dilapidated, barrio-based world of wastedness, Man traces the geographies narrated by George Lipsitz in The Possessive Investment in Whiteness. Historically, Lipsitz argues, the development of affluent white space (the suburbs) was made possible by the disintegration of African American, Chicano and other minority neighbourhoods disadvantaged by federal, state, and corporate housing, employment, health care, urban renewal, and education policies that favoured whites over non-whites. In this sense, Man’s flight from his parents’ home is a retreat from whiteness itself, and from the advantages that whiteness conveys. In choosing the ramshackle, non-white world of stonerism, Man performs an act of racial treachery. Whiteness, Lipsitz contends, has “cash value,” and “is invested in, like property, but it is also a means of accumulating property and keeping it from others,” which allows for “intergenerational transfers of inherited wealth that pass on the spoils of discrimination to succeeding generations” (vii-viii). Man’s disavowal of the privileges of whiteness is a reckless refusal to accept this racial birthright. Whiteness is thus wasted upon Man because Man wastes his whiteness. Given the centrality of prudence and restraint to hegemonic constructions of whiteness, Man’s willingness to squander the “valuable asset” that is his white inheritance is especially treasonous (Harris 1713). Man is the prodigal son of whiteness, a profligate who pours down the drain “the wages of whiteness” that his forbearers have spent generations accruing and protecting (Roediger, The Wages of Whiteness). His waste not only offends the core values which whiteness is said to comprise, it also denigrates whiteness itself by illuminating the excess of white privilege, as well as the unarticulated excess of meanings that hover around whiteness to create the illusion of transcendence and infinite variety. Man’s performance, like all bad performances of whiteness, “disrupt[s] implicit understandings of what it means to be white” (Hartigan 46). The spectre of seeing white domination go ‘up in smoke’—via wasting, as opposed to hoarding, white privilege—amounts to racial treason, and helps not only to explicate why whites in the film find stonerism so menacing, but also to explain the paradox of “pot [making] the people who don’t smoke it even more paranoid than the people who do” (Patterson). While Tommy Chong’s droll assertion that "what makes us so dangerous is that we're harmless" ridicules such paranoia, it ultimately fails to account for the politics of subversive squandering of white privilege that characterise the stoner film (“Biographies”). Stoners in Up in Smoke, as in most other stoner films, are marked as non-white, through association with ethnic Others, through their rejection of mainstream ideas about work and achievement, and/or through their lack of bodily restraint in relentlessly seeking pleasure, in dressing outrageously, and in refusing to abide conventional grooming habits. Significantly, the non-white status of the stoner is both voluntary and deliberate. While stonerism embraces its own non-whiteness, its Otherness is not signified, primarily, through racial cross-dressing of the sort Eric Lott detects in Elvis, but rather through race-mixing. Stoner collectivity practices an inclusivity that defies America’s historic practice of racial and ethnic segregation (Lott 248). Stonerism further reveals its unwillingness to abide constrictive American whiteness in a scene in which Pedro and Man, both US-born Americans, are deported. The pair are rounded up along with Pedro’s extended family in a raid initiated when Pedro’s cousin “narcs” on himself to la migra (the Immigration and Naturalization Service) in order to get free transport for his extended family to his wedding in Tijuana. Pedro and Man return to the US as unwitting tricksters, bringing back to the US more marijuana than has ever crossed the Mexican-US border at one time, fusing the relationship between transnationalism and wastedness. The disrespect that stoners exhibit for pregnable US borders contests presumed Chicano powerlessness in the face of white force and further affronts whiteness, which historically has mobilised itself most virulently at the threat of alien incursion. Transgression here is wilful and playful; stoners intend to offend normative values and taste through their actions, their dress, and non-white associations as part of the project of forging a new hybridised, transnational subjectivity that threatens to lay waste to whiteness’s purity and privilege. Stoners invite the scrutiny of white authority with their outrageous attire and ethnically diverse composition, turning the “inevitability of surveillance” (Borrie 87) into an opportunity to enact their own wastedness—their wasted privilege, their wasted youth, their wasted potential—before a gaze that is ultimately confounded and threatened by the chaotic hybridity with which it is faced (Hebdige 26). By perpetually displaying his/her wasted Otherness, the stoner makes of him/herself a “freak,” a label cops use derisively throughout Up in Smoke to denote the wasted without realising that stoners define themselves in precisely such terms, and, by doing so, obstruct whiteness’s assertion of universal subjectivity. Pedro’s cousin Strawberry (Tom Skerritt), a pot dealer, enacts freakishness by exhibiting a large facial birthmark and by suffering from Vietnam-induced Post Traumatic Stress disorder. A freak in every sense of the word, Strawberry is denied white status by virtue of physical and mental defect. But Strawberry, as a stoner, ultimately wants whiteness even less than it wants him. The defects that deny him membership in the exclusive “club” that is whiteness prove less significant than the choice he makes to defect from the ranks of whiteness and join with Man in the decision to waste his whiteness wantonly (“Editorial”). Stoner masculinity is represented as similarly freakish and defective. While white authority forcefully frustrates the attempts of Pedro and Man to “score” marijuana, the duo’s efforts to “score” sexually are thwarted by their own in/action. More often than not, wastedness produces impotence in Up in Smoke, either literally or figuratively, wherein the confusion and misadventures that attend pot-smoking interrupt foreplay. The film’s only ostensible sex scene is unconsummated, a wasted opportunity for whiteness to reproduce itself when Man sleeps through his girlfriend’s frenzied discussion of sex. During the course of Up in Smoke, Man dresses as a woman while hitchhiking, Pedro mistakes Man for a woman, Man sits on Pedro’s lap when they scramble to change seats whilst being pulled over by the police, Man suggests that Pedro has a “small dick,” Pedro reports liking “manly breasts,” and Pedro—unable to urinate in the presence of Sgt. Stedenko—tells his penis that if it does not perform, he will “put [it] back in the closet.” Such attenuations of the lead characters’ masculinity climax in the penultimate scene, in which Pedro, backed by his band, performs “Earache My Eye,” a song he has just composed backstage, whilst adorned in pink tutu, garter belt, tassle pasties, sequined opera mask and Mickey Mouse ears: My momma talkin’ to me tryin’ to tell me how to liveBut I don't listen to her cause my head is like a sieveMy daddy he disowned me cause I wear my sister's clothesHe caught me in the bathroom with a pair of pantyhoseMy basketball coach he done kicked me off the teamFor wearing high heeled sneakers and acting like a queen“Earache My Eye” corroborates the Othered natured of stonerism by marking stoners, already designated as non-white, as non-straight. In a classic iteration of a bad gender performance, the scene rejects both whiteness and its hegemonic partners-in-crime, heterosexuality and normative masculinity (Butler 26). Here stoners waste not only their whiteness, but also their white masculinity. Whiteness, and its dependence upon “intersection … [with] interlocking axes [of power such as] gender … [and] sexuality,” is “outed” in this scene (Shome 368). So, too, is it enfeebled. In rendering masculinity freakish and defective, the film threatens whiteness at its core. For if whiteness can not depend upon normative masculinity for its reproduction, then, like Man’s racial birthright, it is wasted. The stoner’s embodiment of freakishness further works to emphasise wasted whiteness by exposing just how hysterical whiteness’s defense of its own normativity can be. Up in Smoke frequently inflates not only the effects of marijuana, but also the eccentricities of those who smoke it, a strategy which means that much of the film’s humour turns on satirising hegemonic stereotypes of marijuana smokers. Equally, Cheech Marin’s exaggerated “slapstick, one-dimensional [portrayal] of [a] Chicano character” works to render ridiculous the very stereotypes his character incarnates (List 183). While the film deconstructs processes of social construction, it also makes extensive use of counter-stereotyping in its depictions of characters marked as white. The result is that whiteness’s “illusion of [its] own infinite variety” is contested and the lie of whiteness as non-raced is exposed, helping to explain the stoner’s decision to waste his/her whiteness (Dyer 12; 2). In Up in Smoke whiteness is the colour of straightness. Straights, who are willing neither to smoke pot nor to tolerate the smoking of pot by others/Others, are so comprehensively marked as white in the film that whiteness and straightness become isomorphic. As a result, the same stereotypes are mobilised in representing whiteness and straightness: incompetence, belligerence, hypocrisy, meanspiritedness, and paranoia, qualities that are all the more oppressive because virtually all whites/straights in the film occupy positions of authority. Anthony’s spectacularly white parents, as we have seen, are bigoted and dominating. Their whiteness is further impugned by alcohol, which fuels Mr. Stoner’s fury and Mrs. Stoner’s unintelligibility. That the senior Stoners are drunk before noon works, of course, to expose the hypocrisy of those who would indict marijuana use while ignoring the social damage alcohol can produce. Their inebriation (revealed as chronic in the DVD’s outtake scenes) takes on further significance when it is configured as a decidedly white attribute. Throughout the film, only characters marked as white consume alcohol—most notably, the judge who is discovered to be drinking vodka whist adjudicating drug charges against Pedro and Man—therefore dislodging whiteness’s self-construction as temperate, and suggesting just how wasted whiteness is. While stonerism is represented as pacific, drunkenness is of a piece with white/straight bellicosity. In Up in Smoke, whites/straights crave confrontation and discord, especially the angry, uptight, and vainglorious narcotics cop Sgt. Stedenko (Stacey Keech) who inhabits so many of the film’s counter-stereotypes. While a trio of white cops roughly apprehend and search a carload of innocent nuns in a manner that Man describes as “cold blooded,” Stedenko, unawares in the foreground, gives an interview about his plans for what he hopes will be the biggest border drug bust in US history: “[Reporter:] Do you expect to see any violence here today? [Sgt. Stedenko:] I certainly hope so.” Stedenko’s desire to act violently against stoners echoes mythologies of white regeneration in the Old West, wherein whiteness refurbished itself through violent attacks on Native Americans, whose wasteful cultures failed to make “civilised” use of western lands (Slotkin 565).White aggression is relentlessly depicted in the film, with one important exception: the instance of the stoned straight. Perhaps no other trope is as defining of the genre, as is the scene wherein a straight person accidentally becomes stoned. Up in Smoke offers several examples, most notably the scene in which a motorcycle cop pulls over Pedro and Man as they drive a van belonging to Pedro’s Uncle Chuey. In a plot twist requiring a degree of willing suspension of disbelief that even wasted audiences might find a stretch, the exterior shell of the van, unbeknownst to Pedro and Man, is made entirely of marijuana which has started to smoulder around the exhaust pipe. The cop, who becomes intoxicated whilst walking through the fumes, does not hassle Pedro and Man, as expected, but instead asks for a bite of their hot dog and then departs happily, instructing the duo to “have a nice day.” In declining, or perhaps simply forgetting, to exercise his authority, the cop demonstrates the regenerative potential not of violent whiteness but rather of hybrid wastedness. Marijuana here is transformative, morphing straight consciousness into stoner consciousness and, in the process, discharging all the uptight, mean-spirited, unnecessary, and hence wasteful baggage of whiteness along the way. While such a utopian potential for pot is both upheld and satirised in the film, the scene amounts to far more than an inconsequential generic gag, in that it argues for the disavowal of whiteness via the assumption of the voluntary Otherness that is stonerism. Whiteness, the scene suggests, can be cast off, discarded, wasted and thus surmounted. Whites, for want of a better phrase, simply need to ‘just say no’ to whiteness in order to excrete the brutality that is its necessary affliction and inevitable result. While Up in Smoke laudably offers a powerful refusal to horde the assets of whiteness, the film fails to acknowledge that ‘just saying no’ is, indeed, one of whiteness’s exclusive privileges, since whites and only whites possess the liberty to refuse the advantages whiteness bestows. Non-whites possess no analogical ability to jettison the social constructions to which they are subjected, to refuse the power of dominant classes to define their subjectivity. Neither does the film confront the fact that Man nor any other of Up in Smoke’s white freaks are disallowed from re-embracing their whiteness, and its attendant value, at any time. However inchoate the film’s challenge to racial privilege, Up in Smoke’s celebration of the subversive pleasures of wasting whiteness offers a tentative, if bleary, first step toward ‘the abolition of whiteness.’ Its utopian vision of a post-white hybridised subjectivity, however dazed and confused, is worthy of far more serious contemplation than the film, taken at face value, might seem to suggest. Perhaps Up in Smoke is a stoner film that should also be viewed while sober. ReferencesBill and Ted’s Excellent Adventure. Dir. Stephen Herek. Orion Pictures Corporation, 1989.“Biographies”. 10 June 2010 ‹http://www.cheechandchongfans.com/biography.html›. Borrie, Lee. "Wild Ones: Containment Culture and 1950s Youth Rebellion”. Diss. University of Canterbury, 2007.Butler, Judith. "Critically Queer”. GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 1.1 (1993): 17-32.Chavoya, C. Ondine. “Customized Hybrids: The Art of Ruben Ortiz Torres and Lowriding in Southern California”. CR: The New Centennial Review 4.2 (2004): 141-84.Clerks. Dir. Kevin Smith. Miramax Films, 1994. Dazed and Confused. Dir. Richard Linklater. Cineplex Odeon Films, 1993. Dude, Where’s My Car? Dir. Danny Leiner. Twentieth Century Fox, 2000.Dyer, Richard. White: Essays on Race and Culture. London: Routledge, 1997.“Editorial: Abolish the White Race—By Any Means Necessary”. Race Traitor 1 (1993). 9 June 2010 ‹http://racetraitor.org/abolish.html›.Fast Times at Ridgemont High. Dir. Amy Heckerling. Universal Pictures, 1982.Friday. Dir. F. Gary Gray. New Line Cinema, 1995.Half Baked. Dir. Tamra Davis. Universal Pictures, 1998.Harold and Kumar Go to White Castle. Dir. Danny Leiner. New Line Cinema, 2004.Harris, Cheryl. “Whiteness as Property”. Harvard Law Review 106 (1993): 1707-1791. Hartigan, John Jr. “Objectifying ‘Poor Whites and ‘White Trash’ in Detroit”. White Trash: Race and Class in America. Eds. Matt Wray, and Annalee Newitz. NY: Routledge, 1997. 41-56.Hebdige, Dick. Subculture: The Meaning of Style. London: Methuen, 1979.hooks, bell. Black Looks: Race and Representation. Boston: South End Press, 1992.How High. Dir. Jesse Dylan. Universal Pictures, 2001.Lipsitz, George. The Possessive Investment in Whiteness: How White People Profit fromIdentity Politics. Philadelphia: Temple UP, 2006. List, Christine. "Self-Directed Stereotyping in the Films of Cheech Marin”. Chicanos and Film: Representation and Resistance. Ed. Chon A. Noriega. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 1992. 183-94.Lott, Eric. “Racial Cross-Dressing and the Construction of American Whiteness”. The Cultural Studies Reader. 2nd ed. Ed. Simon During. London: Routledge, 1999. 241-55.McIntosh, Peggy. “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack”. 10 June 2010 ‹http://www.case.edu/president/aaction/UnpackingTheKnapsack.pdf›.Meltzer, Marisa. “Leisure and Innocence: The Eternal Appeal of the Stoner Movie”. Slate 26 June 2007. 10 Aug. 2010 ‹http://www.slate.com/id/2168931›.Toni Morrison. Playing in the Dark: Whiteness and the Literary Imagination. Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1992.Patterson, John. “High and Mighty”. The Guardian 7 June 2008. 10 June 2010 ‹http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/2008/jun/07/2›.Roediger, David. Colored White: Transcending the Racial Past. Berkeley: U of California P, 2002.Roediger, David. The Wages of Whiteness: Race and the Making of the American Working Class. Rev. ed. London: Verso Books, 1999.———. Towards the Abolition of Whiteness: Essays on Race, Class and Politics. London: Verso Books, 1994.Shome, Raka. “Outing Whiteness”. Critical Studies in Media Communication 17.3 (2000): 366-71.Slotkin, Richard. Regeneration through Violence: The Mythology of the American Frontier. Norman: U of Oklahoma P, 1973.Up in Smoke. Dir. Lou Adler. Paramount Pictures, 1978.Wayne’s World. Dir. Penelope Spheeris. Paramount Pictures, 1992.Wiegman, Robyn. “Whiteness Studies and the Paradox of Particularity”. boundary 2 26.3 (1999): 115-50.