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

* To be added references within the text *

Introduction

In the introduction I should address explicitly the topic and the question 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. Maybe placing the research into a larger context and explaining the reason why I zoomed in WDKA. It would be fruitful to talk about 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 (...) 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 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 an educational institution/a fine art school can reflect a government’s /state’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 an ideology structure is established and naturalized )

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

Chapter 2

THE CASE OF WDKA – what does it mean to open the archive of the administration of an educational institution

* ( I am wondering if I need a form that should allow me to have access to the administrative documents of the course. How Leslie and I can be covered in case this research is published? )

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

- How did I conducted my situated research?

In the first sub-chapter I would like to describe the research process. Maybe I could bridge or give a theoretical context regarding the archive and the counter-archive. How public archive can function as a space of appearance and create a testimony? In order to justify my choice of making an archive.

A detailed explanation of the steps I have been through by opening the archive, looking through documents from 2002 till 2022, scanning them, putting them together in a folder, classifying them. 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? I perceive this as a documentation of my process

- What are my observations/comments from the process in relation to the my initial questions (chapter 1)?

In the second sub-chapter I will look deeper in the material that I gathered/created. How this material is capable of drawing inferences or just hints relatable to my initial assumption about the bordering nature of bureaucracy and to 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 combined with the information I gained from the interviews with COIA administrator, the course coordinator, the IND or government legislation can construct a testimony or a small window to answer or just to open a conversation about the invisible – visible apparatus of educational bureaucracy. A this point I will present and collage the different material to structure my argument.

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. THE INTIMATE STORY.

In this chapter 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 – Materialising the metaphor

The bureaucratic form/document as an interface of conflict/discourse (with the intimate story)

Bureaucratic dramaturgies and how you can find (or loose) yourself in them.

The main question of this chapter might be in relation to the the vulnerability of the individual behind bureaucracy. Coming again to the first chapter assumption on how bureaucracy constitutes an immaterial but still a border I would like to extract the intimate stories of vulnerability and the struggles of people.

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

- How a document literature /language constructs an identity, classifies, categories or fragments the person. How a piece of paper in a folder in a drawer in a in a room , in a building can become the barrier or the master. The story of (dis-mis-counter) placement.

How we perceive a bureaucratic document and how this document corresponds or is in conflict with the personal story. How the document de-humanises. How behind every bureaucracy there is hidden violence and how you reveal or talk about it.

I would like to collect some personal small stories/experiences of my peers regarding the bureaucratic obstacle (probably xpub or lens based or piet people). The bureaucratic language/text in relation to the personal gaze over this (bureaucratic)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 misfunctional forms and how people (piet zwart community or basically students) correspond/manoeuvre/hack/mis-read/destroy/mis-use/fake/mess with a (given) form/a document! there is a danger in there. if you reveal the manoeuvres or the hacks, the authorities can always make their security systems better and stronger

Bureaucratic form/document as an interface of conflict/discourse

key-words of this chapter: 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 ongoing deposit of marginalized knowledge about education bureaucracy.