User:₳(ɤ)ɠɭaḯa/T H E S I S O U T L I N E

Introduction

In the introduction I will address explicitly the topic and start drawing the connections between the key terms that I will incorporate in the thesis (as well as in the project) like bureaucracy, border, immaterial (border), document, educational bureaucratic apparatus. I would also provide the reader with my motivation for researching this. It would be useful to add my positioning and why did I chose to do a situated research, why is it important to my practice? Also the introduction is the place and the time to talk about the relation of the thesis with the project since they are weaved together in a inseparable way with each other.

A key question and a starting point. I could What it means to be documented and what inefficiently documented? (maybe I can refer at this point to the recording of this woman’s speech at the demonstration in Amsterdam maybe I can use this as an entry or a starting point structuring my interest/argument in relation to my previous practice)

My voice has not be heard. Today I want to emphasize. We will keep fighting for refugees rights, for migrants rights. I always say, nobody leaves home unless home is dangerous. Nobody leaves home unless home … How many Palestinians do we have in the building? We may not be in Palestine. We are very angry with what happens to Palestine. We are very angry by the wall created by the Western world. We are very sad that the? and the tear guns they are applied to our country (...) I am here of the rights of the children which haven't be in the (?) education since they have undocumented mothers and they are more than? years. I am here to represent mothers who are looking for a place to have a sense of belonging or how long are you trying to continue humiliating them and the female gender. I am here to express my frustration with IND. So frustrated. And I will not stop about democracy. Democracy in the rule of law where everybody feels included. Democracy is a rule of law where everybody feels ... That has undocumented people we don't feel a sense of belonging from the system (...i should transcribe the rest...)

Dam Square Amsterdam 18th of June 2023 , 15:05

Body of text

Chapter 1

BUREAUCRATIC APPARATUS AS IMMATERIAL BORDER

I think that this chapter is going to be a bit more theoretical and will attempt to shape the territory for a future discussion and surround my initial assumption. I will try to understand, unfold these notions and questions listed underneath and find some (inter)connections.

- What is my interest in the notion of border and what is actually a border?

- What is bureaucracy and how bureaucracy can constitute an immaterial border?

- Does bureaucracy constitute an infrastructure within an institution?

- The tyranny of transparency and the supposed neutrality of the form

- How even higher education can reflect government’s rules on migration policies, control, security etc

- Corporization of education and new established bureaucratic rituals (At some point I think is important to clarify the use of ritual. Why the word ritual? It could be this repetitive practice through which a infra-structure is established and naturalized ?)

keywords of this chapter: border (materiality/immateriality), bureaucracy as an immaterial border, educational bureaucracy, infrastructure, reflect, documented

Chapter 2

What does it mean to create a counter archive about higher education within an educational institution?

* The counter- archive (project) will comprise two sections. The first section will include the research regarding the existing documents, statistics, articles, investigation (sourced from the institutions' websites) that will attempt to address and map the aforementioned questions (chapter 1). The second part will consist of misused/fake/poetic/imaginative documents, intimate stories, re-appropriated bureaucracies that my peers and i are going to produce. *

Questions shaping this chapter and framing also my project:

- What is an archive and how you can create publics by creating an archive? What is the desirable relation with the receivers/witnesses?

-What it means to perform a counter-archive and how this act can create publics?

- How did I conducted my situated research/investigation and created the first section of the archive?

At this point I would like to describe the research process. Some a theoretical foreground regarding the archive and the counter-archive. How public archive can function as a space of appearance and create a testimony?

A detailed explanation of the steps I have been through this procedure. The public forms that I searched, scanned, put together in a folder, classified. What do I keep and what do I discard? What do I want to highlight having in the back of my head the questions framing the process? How the way I choose to classify/organize/categorize can produce a different knowledge or an insight and underline my positioning?

This part of the chapter is considered to be the documentation of my mapping - research process.

- What are my observations/comments from the process in relation to the my initial questions in chapter 1? How the way of organising, (de)structuring or performing the collected material is able to construct narratives or possible interpretations?

In the second sub-chapter I will look deeper in the material that I gathered. How this material is capable of drawing inferences or just hints relatable to my initial assumption about the bordering nature of bureaucracy, the transformation of the institution and the migration policies? Is this question answered or even approached during investigation and in what way? How do I structure an argument using a variety of input? How this material is interweaved with the information I gained from my talks with COIA administrator, the course coordinator, the IND or government legislation and can potentially construct a testimony or a small window or answer or just to open a conversation? At this point I will also insert and collage part of the material.

keywords of this chapter: public archive, open archive, research process,documentation of the process, material, results, inferences of research, argument

Chapter 3

BUREAUCRATIC FORM/DOCUMENT AS AN INTERFACE OF VIOLENCE AND VULNERABILITY AND THE INTIMATE STORY BEHIND IT.

I would like at the beginning to frame the second part of the project and analyze the bureaucratic aesthetic in relation to potential behaviors and readings that forces. I would like to focus on the structure of the document as an object/artifact within the bureaucratic apparatus, to talk about the language/graphic design and deconstruct the idea of the supposed neutrality/universality of the document.

*Caps Lock – the designer as engineer

*Writing Machines – Materializing the metaphor

Another question of the second sub-chapter will be in relation to the the vulnerability of the individual behind bureaucracy. The bureaucratic form/document as an interface of conflict/discourse.

I perceive the personal intimate story as the moment of disturbing the form's continuity and the moment that "reveals" the violence. Returning to the assumption made in the first chapter on how bureaucracy constitutes an immaterial border, I would like to extract the intimate stories of vulnerability and the struggles of people. Also in this case I will combine bibliography as well as the material that I gained from my peers and structure the aforementioned argument.

{ the potential material that will be partly presented and interweaved within the body of this chapter are part of the second section of the project:

Collections of some personal small stories/experiences of my peers regarding the bureaucratic obstacle. The bureaucratic language/text in relation to the personal gaze over this text. The personal story or experience that disrupts the continuity of the form. How a structured form can become a (plain) text and an entry for an ongoing discourse. Interviews or annotations or stories or filled mis-functional forms and how people (piet zwart community or basically students) correspond/manoeuvre/hack/mis-read/destroy/misuse/mess with a (given) form/a document }

other possible questions that may come in this chapter:

- What it means to put a document in a different context, or to annotate it or to place it next to a small personal story? What friction or dissonance/paraphony is created there?

- How a document literature /language constructs an identity, classifies, categories, dehumanizes or fragments the person.

keywords of this chapter: bureaucratic aesthetic, vulnerability, personal gaze over the bureaucratic text, story, disrupts continuity, interface of conflict, document, de-humanise

CONCLUSION

I can talk about my research experience and how somebody can contribute to this archive. How this can be become an ongoing project? A future deposit of marginalized knowledge about education's bureaucracy.

References

The project and the thesis are sharing the same references at the moment

Books:

• Bourdieu, P. (1984). *Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste*. Harvard University Press.
• Graeber, D. (2015). The Utopia of Rules: On Technology, Stupidity, and the Secret Joys of Bureaucracy. Melville House Publishing.
• Katherine Hayles, Lunenfeld, P., Burdick, A., and MIT Press (2005). *Writing Machines*. Cambridge; London: MIT Press.
• Khosravi, S. (2021). *Waiting - A Project in Conversation*. Bielefeld Transcript.
• Le Guin, U.K. (1999). The Dispossessed. Turtleback Books.
• Samellas, A. (2020). "(Forced) Movement". kyklada.press

Journals

• Berghahn Journals. (n.d.). *The Cambridge Journal of Anthropology Volume 33 Issue 1: Remaking the Public Good: A New Anthropology of Bureaucracy*. [Available at https://www.berghahnjournals.com/view/journals/cja/33/1/cja.33.issue-1.xml]
• Borelli, C., Poy, A., and Rué, A. (2023). "Governing Asylum without 'Being There': Ghost Bureaucracy, Outsourcing, and the Unreachability of the State." *Social Sciences*, 12(3), 169. [DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci12030169]
• Churcher, M. and Talbot, D. (2020). The Corporatisation of Education: Bureaucracy, boredom, and Transformative Possibilities. New Formations, [online] 100(100), p.28. Available at: https://www.academia.edu/49053008/The_Corporatisation_of_Education_Bureaucracy_Boredom_and_Transformative_Possibilities [Accessed 5 Nov. 2023]
• Derrida, J. and Prenowitz, E. (1995). Archive Fever: A Freudian Impression. Diacritics, 25(2), pp.9–63. doi:https://doi.org/10.2307/465144.
• Kouros, P. (n.d.). "The Public Art of Performative Archiving." [Available at https://www.academia.edu/35065602/The_public_art_of_performative_archiving]
• Strathern, M. (2000). The Tyranny of Transparency. British Educational Research Journal, [online] 26(3), pp.309–321. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1501878 [Accessed 11 May 2020].

Videos

• Azoulay, A. (n.d.). *Un-Documented: Unlearning Imperial Plunder*. [Available at https://vimeo.com/490778435]
• Biemann, U. (n.d.). *GEOBODIES | Ursula Biemann*. [Available at https://geobodies.org/art-and-videos/performing-the-border/]

Websites

• Politicalconcepts.org. (2011). Archive: Ariella Azoulay. [Available at http://www.politicalconcepts.org/archive-ariella-azoulay/]

Annotated Bibliography

[pad annotated bibliography]