When I was writing my dissertation, my wise supervisor advised me to ‘aim for defendable’. In this piece, I have done the opposite. I could defend its indefensibility by framing it as an example of ‘dirty writing’ (Pullen & Rhodes, 2008), built to make room for the raw, uncertain, and intemperate – but that move seems a little contradictory. Rather than looking for a rational argument, readers might like to pay attention to the thoughts and feelings it provokes in them; being provocative is, after all, one of the key goals of a manifesto.
GaleK., & WyattJ. (2009). Between the two: A nomadic inquiry into the collaborative writing and subjectivity.Newcastle upon Tyne, England: Cambridge Scholars.
WyattJ., & AdamsT. E. (2014). Introduction. In WyattJ. & AdamsT. E. (Eds.), On (writing) families: Autoethnographies of presence and absence, love and loss (pp. 1–6). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense.
4.
WyattJ., GaleK., GannonS., & DaviesB. (2011). Deleuze and collaborative writing: An immanent plane of composition.New York, NY: Peter Lang.
