Cross Postings - Disciplinary Knowledge-Making and the Affective Archive of the WPA Listserv

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by kopisore

The article examines how the WPA Listserv (WPA-L) functions as a site of disciplinary knowledge-making and emotion work within composition studies, especially amid uncertainty about its future. It analyzes the listserv’s potential for democratizing participation and highlights how diverse perspectives and lifeworlds intersect on the platform. Focusing on major moments around April–May 2021 and earlier controversies, the piece argues the WPA-L operates as an archive of affects, felt impressions, and emotional intensities shaped by members’ experiences.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages18

Reading Time45 min

AccessFree to download

Disciplinary Knowledge-Making and the Affective Archive of the WPA Listserv

The listserv’s role in communication and knowledge making

Controversies, dialogue, and emotionally felt perspectives

Cross Postings: Disciplinary Knowledge-Making and the Affective Archive of the WPA Listserv Zachary Beare As the future of the WPA Listserv (WPA-L) remains uncertain, this article reflects on the ways the WPA-L has functioned as an important site of disciplinary knowledge-making and emotion work for the field of composition studies. It examines the potential of the listserv format for democratizing participation in the enterprise of disciplinary knowledge-making and examines how perspectives and lifeworlds of a diverse field have come into contact on the platform. Such a dynamic showcases tensions, ongoing dialogue, and emotionally felt perspectives not often visible in (or sometimes erased from) traditional sites of scholarly publication. On April 28, 2021, Barry Maid, the longtime administrator of the WPA Listserv (WPA-L) wrote to the list announcing that upon (or shortly before) his retirement on May 15, 2021, all listserv operations and posting privileges would be (at least temporarily) suspended. This unexpected announcement occurred at a turbulent time in the listserv’s history. Many had been questioning the usefulness of the platform and some had already suggested dissolving it entirely, arguing the hostility, racism, and sexism exhibited on the listserv left it unredeemable. Over the last several years, I have seen the WPA-L referred to on Twitter and Facebook as, among other things,“a dumpster fire,” “a car crash you can’t look away from,” and “an irredeemable cesspool of everything that is toxic in the academy.” I understand where these characterizations come from and why so many have questioned whether the listserv could remain a productive site of conversation and resource sharing. Like many others, I have been shocked and infuriated by messages and conversational turns that have taken place in heated threads. I am thinking, for instance, about the discussion of Vershawn Ashanti Young’s CFP for the 2019 Conference on College Composition and Communication that (d)evolved into a debate over the legitimacy of codeswitching and codemeshing; about Michelle LaFrance’s brave calling out of a culture of mansplaining on the listserv and the clumsy, sexist commentary that resisted her apt charge; and about the shouting match about Heterodoxy and whether rhetoric and composition as a field suffers from a lack of viewpoint diversity that inspired dozens of messages in early 2019. I am also thinking about the terrifying moment in which an anonymous user going by the name “Grand Scholar Wiz Composition Studies 49.1 (2021): 42–59 ard” wrote in to the list. Not only did this anonymous troll dismiss the significance of points being made by scholars of color as they engaged in a dialogue about issues raised in Asao Inoue’s 2019 CCCC Chair’s Address, this person did so under a moniker clearly inspired by racist and white supremacist rhetorics. These and similar threads have been examined, both directly and indirectly, in several recent publications, including in a CCC article by Marnie Twigg, a symposium in Writing Program Administration edited by Michelle LaFrance and Elizabeth Wardle, and in a book chapter by John Trimbur. These threads were also discussed extensively in a “Where We Are” dialogue published in Composition Studies in fall of 2019 between the recently-formed WPA-L Working Group and founders of the nextGEN listserv. While there was clear overlap in the philosophies of these groups, their responses could be read as a tension between reformers and revolutionaries, the former who sought to remedy the many problems of the WPA-L and the latter who suggested an exit and new build would be more appropriate and safer for many. I saw the appeal of both of these responses. I read the threads inspiring these reactions—and the backchannel commentaries about them across social media—with great interest. I have been thinking about the listserv and its disciplinary functions for several years. While I understand why the

FAQs

Why does the author focus on the WPA-L despite doubts about its usefulness?

The author argues that, even during turbulent moments, the WPA-L remains an important archive of disciplinary knowledge-making and deserves further attention.

What kind of archive does the author claim the listserv creates?

The author describes it as an archive of affects: felt impressions and emotionally intense experiences surrounding the field’s work and members.

What happened around April 28, 2021 that changed the listserv’s operations?

Barry Maid announced that upon (or shortly before) his retirement on May 15, 2021, all listserv operations and posting privileges would be temporarily suspended.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by kopisore