It appears as if I am going to have to restructure my dissertation. At present it is organised historically from intro, theory chapter, fieldwork, theory chapter, then early to late history of certain dimensions of the scene (1970s, 1980s, 1990s). I shall have to go back to an earlier structure of fieldwork examples followed by historical examples and then argument/explication per chapter. This shift was always on the cards and I sort of knew that writing up the history as I was doing it was going to be insufficient.
Part of my problem is that I can see the connections between everything in my diss. I am precariously posed on a massive network of connected arguments and ideas. I make myself feel slightly sick sometimes thinking about it all, not an enduring sickness, but short, sharp moments of nausea. From this I need to extract my ‘red thread’. The ‘red thread’ is the line of argument that ties it all together. I have a number of possible red threads. Some of the more sensible red threads would simply be intolerable. This is part of my problem, because I don’t really want to compromise. As an alleged scholar I know that approaching research without some idea of a red thread appears to be the work of abject stupidity. Yes, I disavow myself completely. However, this has meant I have approached my research material without being blinkered too much, which was sort of good, but now I need some blinkers. Fast.
Being able to produce a dozen explanations of one’s research is not good if you only need one argument.
You only need one argument to produce the monolithic Thesis (capital T intentional). Find a compromise that is bearable in the short term to get the monkey off your back.
Keep the other red threads for another time and place. Get the big T out of the way and then slice and dice them; put aside the parts of your thesis you no longer care for and move revist the parts that still appeal to you.
It can be done! It’s just one performance!
“SPEAK JUST THE SAME. BECAUSE YOUR LANGUAGE DOESN’T FOLLOW JUST ONE THREAD, ONE COURSE, OR ONE PATTERN, WE ARE IN LUCK. YOU SPEAK FROM EVERYWHERE AT THE SAME TIME. YOU TOUCH ME WHOLE AT THE SAME TIME. IN ALL SENSES. WHY ONLY ONE SONG, ONE DISCOURSE, ONE TEXT AT A TIME? …”
– LUCE IRIGARAY
As I was reading your post, I was thinking of Irigaray, and what do you know, chaste has already mentioned her…this does not, of course, help you but I can see another red thread forming in my own microcosmic universe! This is not the point, and to be completely reductionist, too many red threads is the bittersweet stuff of the analytical mind. I am sure you are well on your way to fraying and decaying those threads which no longer matter, or matter less. BTW, even though I find your blog fairly hardgoing, I love your style of writing, and am glad I stumbled upon it in the midst of blog-surfing. Good luck.