This article develops a concept of liminal hotspots in the context of (a) a secondary analysis of a cyberbullying case involving a group of school children from a Danish school and (b) an altered auto-ethnography in which the authors “entangle” their own experiences with the case analysis. These two sources are used to build an account of a liminal hotspot conceived as an occasion of troubled and suspended transformative transition in which a liminal phase is extended and remains unresolved. The altered auto-ethnography is used to explore the affectivity at play in liminal hotspots, and this liminal affectivity is characterized in terms of volatility, vacillation, suggestibility, and paradox.
BaradK. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
2.
ColemanR.RingroseJ. (Eds.). (2013). Deleuze and research methodologies. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.
3.
DuchinskyR.GrecoM.SolomonJ. (2015). The politics of attachment: Lines of flight with Bowlby, Deleuze, and Guattari. Theory, Culture & Society, 32(7–8), 173–195.
4.
EllisC.RawickiJ. (2013). Collaborative witnessing of survival during the Holocaust: An exemplar of relational autoethnography. Qualitative Inquiry, 19, 366–380.
5.
EllwoodC.DaviesB. (2010). Violence and the moral order in contemporary schooling: A discursive analysis. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 7(2), 85–98.
6.
GirardR. T. (1986). The scapegoat. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
7.
GrecoM.StennerP. (2017). From paradox to pattern shift: Conceptualising liminal hotspots and their affective dynamics. Theory & Psychology, 27, 147–166.
8.
HansenH. R. (2011). Lærerliv og elevmobning [Teacher life and student bullying] (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Aarhus Universitet, Denmark.
9.
HollwayW.JeffersonT. (2013). Doing qualitative research differently. London, UK: Sage.
10.
HortonP. (2011). School bullying and social and moral orders. Children & Society, 25(4), 268–277. doi:10.1111/j.1099–0860.2011.00377.x
11.
JacksonD.LedererW. J.WatzlawickP.MenningersK. A. (1967). Pragmatics of human communication: A study of interactional patterns, pathologies and paradoxes. New York, NY: Norton & Co.
12.
KofoedJ. (2008). Muted transitions. The European Journal of the Psychology of Education, 23, 199–212.
13.
KofoedJ. (2009, May). Emotional evaluations in activities recognized as cyber bullying. Paper presented at “The good, the bad and the challenging: The user and the future of information and communication technologies”. A transdisciplinary conference, Copenhagen, Denmark.
14.
KofoedJ. (2012). Saturated knowledge? Affective rhythms as a productive analytical concept. Paper presented at the Fifth Psychosocial Studies Network Conference, Institute of Education, London, UK.
15.
KofoedJ. (2013). Affektive rytmer: Spektakularitet og ubestemmelighed i digital mobning [Affective rhythms: Spectacularity and subtleties in cyberbullying]. In KofoedJ.SøndergaardD. M. (Eds.), Mobning gentænkt [Rethinking bullying] (pp. 161–193). Copenhagen, Denmark: Hans Reitzels Forlag.
16.
KofoedJ. (2014). Non-simultaneity in cyberbullying. In SchottR. M.SøndergaardD. M. (Eds.), School bullying: New theories in context (pp. 159–185). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
17.
KofoedJ.RingroseJ. (2012). Travelling and sticky affects: Exploring teens and sexualized cyberbullying through a Butlerian-Deleuzian-Guattarian lens. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 33(1), 5–20.
18.
KofoedJ.SøndergaardD. M. (Eds.). (2009). Mobning: Sociale processer på afveje [Bullying: Social processes gone awry]. Copenhagen, Denmark: Hans Reitzels Forlag.
19.
KofoedJ.SøndergaardD. M. (Eds.). (2013). Mobning gentænkt [Rethinking bullying]. Copenhagen, Denmark: Hans Reitzels Forlag.
20.
LatherP. (2004, April). Getting lost: Feminist efforts toward a double(d) science. Paper presented at the AERA Symposium: Shifting imaginaries in curriculum research: Feminist poststructural modes towards enhancing visibility and credibility, San Diego, CA.
21.
LatherP. (2007). Getting lost: Feminist efforts toward a double(d) science. Albany: State University of New York Press.
22.
LuryC.WakefordN. (2012). Inventive methods: The happening of the social. London, UK: Routledge.
23.
MacLureM. (2013). Classification or wonder? Coding as an analytic practice in qualitative research. In ColemanR.RingroseJ. (Eds.), Deleuze and research methodologies (pp. 164–184). Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.
24.
MassumiB. (2002). Parables for the virtual: Movement, affect, sensation. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
25.
MotzkauJ. (2009). Exploring the transdisciplinary trajectory of suggestibility. Subjectivity, 27(1), 172–194.
26.
NissenM.VitusK.JeffersonA.HouborgE.IngholtL. (2015). Utopiarbejde – udkast til en forskningsmetode [Utopiawork – Draft for a research method]. In MunkK. P.MøllerJ. E.BengtsenS. (Eds.), Metodefetichisme: Kvalitativ metode på afveje? Ophav, kritik, nye perspektiver [Fetishism of methods: Qualitative methods gone awry?] (pp. 145–173). Aarhus, Denmark: Aarhus Universitetsforlag.
27.
OlweusD. (1992). Mobbing i skolen – Hva vi vet og hva vi kan gjøre [Bullying in schools: What we know and what we can do]. Oslo, Norway: Universitetsforlaget.
28.
RingroseJ.RenoldE. (2011). Boys, girls and normative violence in schools: A gendered critique of bully discourses. In BarterC.BerridgeD. (Eds.), Children behaving badly? Peer violence between children and young people. Chichester, UK: Wiley & Sons.
29.
SchottR. M.SøndergaardD. M. (2013). School bullying: New theories in context. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
30.
SedgwickE. (2003). Touching feeling: Affect, pedagogy, performativity. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
31.
SlonjeR.SmithP. K. (2008). Cyberbullying: Another main type of bullying?Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 49, 147–154.
32.
StaunæsD.KofoedJ. (2015). Producing curious affects: Visual methodology as an affecting and conflictual wunderkammer. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 28, 1229–1248. doi: 10.1080/09518398.2014.975296
33.
StennerP. (2008). A. N. Whitehead and subjectivity. Subjectivity: International Journal of Critical Psychology, 22(1), 90–109.
34.
StennerP. (2011). James and Whitehead: Assemblage and systematization of a deeply empiricist mosaic philosophy. European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy, 3(1), 101–130.
35.
StennerP. (2016). Liminalität, un-Wohl-Gefühle und die affektive Wende [Liminality, un-wellbeing, and the affective turn]. In MixaE.PritzS. M.TumeltshammerM.GrecoM. (Eds.), Un-wohl Gefühle: Eine kulturanalyse gegenwärtiger befindichkeiten [Un-wellbeing: A cultural analysis of contemporary feelings] (pp. 45–67). Bielefeld, Germany: Transcript-Verlag.
36.
StennerP.MorenoE. (2013). Liminality and affectivity: The case of deceased organ donation. Subjectivity, 6(3), 229–253.
37.
SzakolczaiA. (2009). Liminality and experience: Structuring transitory situations and transformative events. International Political Anthropology, 2(1), 31.
38.
SzakolczaiA. (2017). Permanent (trickster) liminality: The reasons of the heart and of the mind. Theory & Psychology, 27, 231–248.
39.
ThomassenB. (2014). Liminality and the modern: Living through the in-between. Farnham, UK: Ashgate.
40.
TurnerV. W. (1979). Betwixt and between: The liminal period in rites de passage. In LessaW. A.VogtE. Z. (Eds.), Reader in comparative religion: An anthropological approach (pp. 234–243). New York, NY: Harper & Row. (Original work published 1964)
41.
TurnerV. (1982). From ritual to theatre: The human seriousness of play. New York, NY: PAJ.
42.
TurnerV. W. (1995). The ritual process: Structure and anti-structure. Piscataway, NJ: Transaction. (Original work published 1969)
43.
UrwinC.HaugeM.-I.HollwayW.HaavindH. (2013). Becoming a mother through culture. Qualitative Inquiry, 19(6), 470–479.
44.
van GennepA. (1960). The rites of passage. London, UK: Routledge. (Original work published 1908)
45.
WetherellM. (2012). Affect and emotion: A new social science understanding. London, UK: Sage.
