Uncovering and (Re)Imagining Ideologies Surrounding Corporeal Inscriptions of Two PhD Students

• In Event: Difficult Dialogues in Uncertain Times: Creating Duoethnographic Spaces and Taking Responsibility as Scholar-Educators

Abstract

This proposed oral presentation attempts to dissect a recent duoethnographic study on the corporeal inscriptions of two PhD students. This project was inspired through two PhD students’ journey into academia while maintaining our own corporeal subjectivities. Inspired by the work of Grosz (1994), the authors discuss their own positionality and cultural codifications in their academic disciplines.

According to Grosz (1994), “inscriptions on the subject’s body coagulate corporeal signifiers into signs, producing all the effects of meaning, representations, depth, within or subtending our social order” (p.141). Influenced in the theoretical groundings of Grosz (1994), the authors discuss their own corporeal inscriptions and how the embodiment of sex, class, race, and cultural codifications relate to social positions and relations while finding positionality within academia. Researchers have identified how men engage in transformative processes to embody masculine subjectivities, for example, through sport and fitness (Monaghan & Hardy, 2009; Kehler, 2010), cosmetic surgery (Atkinson, 2008; Gill, Henwood, & McLean, 2005), body modification (Lingis, 1984), and fashion (Bordo, 1999). While the notion of body projects and corporeal inscriptions allow for self-expression (Gill, Henwood, and McLean, 2009), the visible etchings, both voluntary and genealogical result in gaze and surveillance.

For this proposed oral presentation, the authors discuss how the etchings on their “canvas” of masculine embodiment provide critical insight into the production of positionality in the development of their academic journey. According to Kehler and Atkinson (2008), “in researching bodies in a particular space, we had to first confront our own material embodiment and the associated problems of identity inherent in such embodiment.” In our duoethnography, we discuss our own critical self-reflections of our own body projections in how we are visualized and how this could/can/does affect our “prospective” paths in academia. In being critically reflective and reflexive of our visualized projection, we have drawn upon the relations of our positions, while coming from different backgrounds and body subjectivities.

For one author, being a white, able-bodied, thus privileged male in academia places an interesting dichotomy of feminine and masculine relations and how men as allies fit into an unbalanced equation of gender relations. For another author, being a white male, with extensive body modifications and tattooing (see below) in academia, creates another dichotomy of perceived academic professionalism and body autonomy. While the paths are different, the convergence of experiences brings a unique lens into the sensibilities of doctoral research.

In alignment with Grosz (1994), the authors want to display that the disciplinarily aspects in academia create, “docile, obedient subject whose body and movements parallel and correlate with the efficiency of a machine or a body whose desire is to confess about its innermost subjectivity and sexuality to institutionally sanctioned authorities” (p. 148). In resisting the rigidity often placed within academia, we hope to highlight the importance of individuality and embodiment and the richness that this brings to our research. While our individual corporeality may not fit the “cultural norm”, our embodiment of cultural inscriptions provides a unique lens that we and many others who challenge conformity, bring valuable experiences to educational research.

Author

• Chris Borduas, University of Calgary- Werklund School of Education