My doctoral study was focussed on women’s activities and practices in community organizations. In this paper, I revisit “the hug,” a fieldwork event (understood in the Deleuzian sense as something—a situation or a problem—that provokes thought) recreating it as a pedagogical event in relation to emerging Deleuzo–Guattarian and new materialist qualitative (QI) pedagogies. The effect of the hug event demonstrates the potential productivity of emerging QI pedagogies, and implications for what intra-active QI pedagogies might produce for researchers, and the research community at large.
AbertonH. (2004). The Trojan Mouse: Hidden aspects of older adult learners entering the IT world (Unpublished Master’s thesis). University of Melbourne, Australia.
2.
AbertonH. (2011). Learner assemblage: Women’s informal learning in voluntary community organisations (Unpublished PhD thesis). University of Melbourne, Australia.
3.
AndersonB. (2009). Affective atmospheres. Emotion, Space and Society, 2, 77-81. doi:10.1016/j.emospa.2009.08.005
4.
BaradK. (2003). Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28, 801-831.
5.
BaradK. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
6.
BlackmanL. (2015). Researching affect and embodied hauntologies: Exploring an analytics of experimentation. In KnudsenB.StageC. (Eds.), Affective methodologies: Developing cultural research strategies for the study of affect (pp. 25-44). London, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
7.
DeleuzeG. (1988). Spinoza: Practical philosophy (HurleyR., Trans.). San Francisco, CA: City Lights Books. (Original work published 1970)
DeleuzeG.GuattariF. (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia (B. Massumi, Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
10.
DuffC. (2010). On the role of affect and practice in the production of place. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 28, 881-895. doi:10.1068/d16209
11.
FoxN.AlldredP. (2016). Sociology and the new materialism. London, England: SAGE.
12.
FoxN.AlldredP. (In press). New materialism. In AtkinsonP.DelamontS.HardyM.WilliamsM. (Eds.), SAGE research methods foundations. London, England: SAGE.
13.
GallagherK. (2016). Navigating the emotional terrain of research: Affect and reason by way of imagination. In ZembylasM.SchutzP. (Eds.), Methodological advances in research on emotion and education (pp. 83-94). Cham, Switzerland: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-20049-2_2
14.
GherardiS.MurgiaA.BellèE.MieleF.CarrerA. (2019). Tracking the sociomaterial traces of affect at the crossroads of affect and practice theories. Qualitative Research in Organizations and Management: An International Journal, 14(3), 295-316. doi:10.1108/QROM-04-2018-1624
15.
GibbsA. (2015). Writing as method: Attunement, resonance, and rhythm. In KnudsenB.StageC. (Eds.), Affective methodologies: Developing cultural research strategies for the study of affect (pp. 222-236). London, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
16.
HarawayD. (1994). A game of Cat’s Cradle: Science studies, feminist theory, cultural studies. Configurations, 2, 59-71.
17.
HultmanK.Lenz TaguchiH. (2010). Challenging anthropocentric analysis of visual data: A relational materialist methodological approach to educational research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 23, 525-542. doi:10.1080/09518398.2010.500628
18.
KnudsenB.StageC. (Eds.). (2015). Affective methodologies: Developing cultural research strategies for the study of affect. London, England: Palgrave Macmillan.
KubyC.ChristR. (2018). Productive aporias and inten(t/s)ionalities of paradigming: Spacetimematterings in an introductory qualitative research course. Qualitative Inquiry, 24, 293-304. doi:10.1177/1077800416684870
21.
LatourB. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to actor-network-theory. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
22.
LawJ. (2004). After method: Mess in social science research. London, England: Routledge.
23.
LawJ. (2007a). Making a mess with method. In OuthwaiteW.TurnerS. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of social science methodology (pp. 595-606). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
24.
LawJ. (2007b). Pinboards and books: Juxtaposing, learning and materiality. In KrittD.WinegarL. (Eds.), Education and technology: Critical perspectives, possible futures (pp. 125-149). Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
25.
Lenz TaguchiH. (2013). Images of thinking in feminist materialisms: Ontological divergences and the production of researcher subjectivities. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26, 706-716. doi:10.1080/09518398.2013.788759
26.
MacLureM. (2013). Researching without representation? Language and materiality in post-qualitative methodology. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26, 658-667. doi:10.1080/09518398.2013.788755
27.
RichardsonL.St. PierreE. (2005). Writing: A method of enquiry. In DenzinN.LincolnY. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed., pp. 959-978). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
28.
St. PierreE. (1997). Methodology in the fold and the irruption of transgressive data. Qualitative Studies in Education, 10, 175-189.
29.
St. PierreE.JacksonA.MazzeiL. (2016). New empiricisms and new materialisms: Conditions for new inquiry. Cultural Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies, 16, 99-110. doi:10.1177/1532708616638694
30.
TaylorC.HughesC. (Eds.). (2016). Posthuman research practices in education. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
