Young Nordic Children’s Aesthetic Explorations of Crows
  • Nina OdegardEmail author
Part of the Children: Global Posthumanist Perspectives and Materialist Theories book series (CGPPMT)


Drawing on an ongoing visual ethnographic project (Pink in Doing visual ethnography: Images, media and representation in research. London, Sage, 2007) about young children’s aesthetic explorations, in this chapter, I explore different encounters with diverse matter in a creative reuse center called a “Remida”, in a Nordic context. As a researcher, I use the concept of aesthetic exploration to highlight the multisensory complexity of young children’s play and learning. In the Remida’s blackbox—a dark space is created for exploring recycled materials using digital and analog tools—sight is weakened, and other senses are heightened. Darkness, light, shadows, and materials are analyzed as agentic co-creators that command our attention as humans (Bennett in Vibrant matter: A political ecology of things. Duke University Press, Durham, London, 2010). Becoming entangled with data, exploring material relations, through photos, videos, and sound recordings of young children’s aesthetic explorations of crows, I unpack sensorial texts through a hypermodal lens. This lens represents the coalition between multimodality and hypertextuality such as text, visual, and audible units.


Aesthetic explorations Hypermodality Movements Photo matter Entanglements 


  1. Ahlskog-Björkman, E. (2017). Att inspirera barn til konstnärligt seande. In C. Wallerstedt, A. Berglund, & N. Pramling (Eds.), Konstnärlig seende & vad barn kan lära på museum (pp. 13–25). Gøteborg: Nordiska Akvarellmuseet.Google Scholar
  2. Barad, K. (2007). Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barad, K. (2008). Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. In S. Alaimo & S. J. Hekman (Eds.), Material feminisms (pp. 120–157). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Barad, K. (2012). Intra-actions: An interview with Karen Barad by Adam Kleinman. Mousse, 34, 76–81.Google Scholar
  5. Barthes, R. (1993). Camera lucida: Reflections on photography. London: Vintage.Google Scholar
  6. Bennett, J. (2010). Vibrant matter: A political ecology of things. Durham, London: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Bjørnestad, E., & Os, E. (2018). Quality in Norwegian childcare for toddlers using ITERS-R. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 26(1), 111–127. Scholar
  8. Breitbach, J. (2011). The photo-as-thing: Photography and thing theory. European Journal of English Studies, 15(1), 31–43. Scholar
  9. Guyer, P. (2014). A history of modern aesthetics: Vol. 3 the twentieth century. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Haraway, D. J. (2016). Staying with the trouble. Making Kin in the Chthulucene. Durham & London: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Hultman, K., & Lenz Taguchi, H. (2010). Challenging anthropocentric analysis of visual data: A relational materialist methodological approach to educational research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 23(5), 525–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hultman, K. (2011). Barn, linjaler och andre aktörer. Posthumanistiske perspektiv på subjekskapende och matrialitet i forskola/skola. (Ph.d. Artikkelsamling), Stockholm University, Stockholm.Google Scholar
  13. Hultman, K. (2017). Förundran, förbryllning, etik och estetik. In A. Palmer, J. Unga & K. Hultman (Eds.), Svindlanda matematikk. Estetikk, etikk och utforskande i förskolan (pp. 29–39). Mlmö: Gleerups.Google Scholar
  14. Jackson, A. Y., & Mazzei, L. A. (2013). Plugging one text into another. Qualitative Inquiry, 19(4), 261–271. Scholar
  15. Johnson, A. (2016). The face of civility: Engaging critical pedagogy through hypermodality. Qualitative Inquiry, 22(3), 198–199. Scholar
  16. Koro-Ljungberg, M., & MacLure, M. (2013). Provocations, re-un-visions, death, and other possibilities of “data” cultural studies ? Critical Methodologies, 13(4), 219–222. Scholar
  17. Kunnskapsdepartementet. (2005). Lov 17. juni 2005 nr. 64 om barnehager (barnehageloven) [The Kindergarten Act. Ministry of education and research]. Oslo: Kunnskapsdepartementet.Google Scholar
  18. Kunnskapsdepartementet. (2017). Rammeplan for barnehagen. Innhold og oppgaver [Curriculum for barnehagen. Content and tasks]. Oslo, 24.04.2017: Pedlex.Google Scholar
  19. Land, N., & Danis, I. (2016). Movement/ing provocations in early childhood education. Journal of Childhood Studies, 41(3), 26–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lather, P. (2007). Getting lost. Feminists efforts towards a double(d) science. New York: State University of New York Press, Albany.Google Scholar
  21. Law, J. (2002). Aircraft stories: Decentering the object in technoscience. Durham, London: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Lemke, J. L. (2002). Travels in hypermodality. Visual Communication, 1(3), 299–325. Scholar
  23. Lenz Taguchi, H. (1997). Varför pedagogisk dokumentation? om barnsyn, kunskapssyn och ett förændrat förhållningssätt till förskolans arbete. [Stockholm]: HLS förlag.Google Scholar
  24. Lenz Taguchi, H. (2010). Going beyond the theory/practice divide in early childhood education: Introducing an intra-active pedagogy. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Lenz Taguchi, H. (2014). New materialisms and play. In E. Broker, S. Edwards & M. Blaise (Eds.), The Sage handbook on play and learning. London, New York: Sage.Google Scholar
  26. Lorvik Waterhouse, A.-H. (2013). I materialenes verden: perspektiver og praksiser i barnehagens kunstneriske virksomhet. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget.Google Scholar
  27. MacLure, M. (2013a). Researching without representation? Language and materiality in post-qualitative methodology. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26(6), 658–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. MacLure, M. (2013b). The wonder of data. Cultural Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies, 13(4), 228–232. Scholar
  29. MacRae, C., Hackett, A., Holmes, R., & Jones, L. (2017). Vibrancy, repetition and movement: Posthuman theories for reconceptualize young children in museums. Children’s Geographies, 1–13.Google Scholar
  30. Manning, E. (2013). Always more than one: Individuation’s dance. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Manning, E. (2014). Wondering the world directly? or, how movement outruns the subject. Body & Society, 20(3–4), 162–188. Scholar
  32. Manning, E., & Massumi, B. (2014). Thought in the act—Passages in the ecology of experience. Minneapolis, London: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  33. Odegard, N. (2012). When matter comes to matter—Working pedagogically with junk materials. Education Inquiry, 3(3), 387–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Odegard, N. (2015). Gjenbruk som kreativ kraft. Når (materi)AL(ite)T henger sammen med alt. [Reuse as a creative force. When matter comes to matter]. Oslo: Pedagogisk forum.Google Scholar
  35. Odegard, N., & Rossholt, N. (2016). In-between spaces. Tales from a Remida. In A. B. Reinertsen (Ed.), Becoming earth: A post human turn in educational discourse collapsing nature/culture divides. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.Google Scholar
  36. Olsson, L. M. (2009). Movement and experimentation in young children’s learning: Deleuze and Guattari in early childhood education. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Olsson, L. M., Dahlberg, G., & Theorell, E. (2016). Discplacing identity—placing aesthetics: Early childhood literacy in a globalized world. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 37(5), 717–738. Scholar
  38. Pacini-Ketchabaw, V., Kind, S., & Kocher, L. L. M. (2017). Encounters with materials in early childhood education. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  39. Pink, S. (2007). Doing visual ethnography: Images, media and representation in research (2nd ed.). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rautio, P. (2016, November). Keynote Pauliina Rautio. Paper presented at the Summer Institute of the Antipodes, Western Sydney University. Retrieved from
  41. Rautio, P. (2017). Thinking about life and species lines with Pietari and Otto (and garlic breath). TRACE: Finnish Journal for Human-Animal Studies, 3, 94–102.Google Scholar
  42. Reichelmann, C. (2014). Kråker - et portrett [Crows]. Berlin: Press.Google Scholar
  43. Remida. (2018). Reggio Children Foundation. Retrieved from
  44. Staunæs, D., & Kofoed, J. (2014). Producing curious affects: Visual methodology as an affecting and conflictual wunderkammer. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 1–20. Scholar
  45. Towle, B. L. (2017). CUPS. The affective force of ‘things’ on learning and subjectivity in early childhood education. (Master of education), Auckland University, Auckland, Aoteoroa New Zealand.Google Scholar
  46. Ulmer, J. B. (2016). Photography interrupted. Qualitative Inquiry, 22(3), 176–182. Scholar
  47. Vecchi, V. (2010). Art and creativity in Reggio Emilia: Exploring the role and potential of ateliers in early childhood education (Vol. 8). Abingdon: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Education and International StudiesDepartment of Early Childhood EducationOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations