Mundane Habits, Ordinary Affects, and Methodological Creations

  • Rachel Holmes
  • Liz Jones
  • Jayne OsgoodEmail author
Living reference work entry
Part of the Springer International Handbooks of Education book series (SIHE)


The aim of this chapter is to rethink “thought” in qualitative inquiry. We attend to possibilities that open up when we turn our attention to habits, ordinary affects, and methodological creations that are integral to the ways in which we think. The challenge of putting new materialism and post-humanism to work requires significant ontological and epistemological shifts. Nevertheless, it is only by shifting the ground on which specific knowledge claims are made that we can potentiate a different logic which in turn can alter both thinking and, importantly, early years practice. Thus this chapter will resolutely refute general ideas or models of what constitute familiar objects in early childhood settings, for example, “the cardboard box” or “the snowman” [sic]. Instead, such models, in situating them within a “zone of indeterminacy” (Massumi 1993, p. 99), are, as a consequence, freed from habitual assumptions – assumptions that, in our view, delimit the possibilities of what is possible. The chapter works with objects and processes, deliberately avoiding foregrounding the child, to leave the uncertainty and ambiguity of which things are in play, alive in the text. Through experimental methods the chapter will draw on two early years projects: 2-Curious (a program of continued professional development for early years practitioners in Manchester, UK) and Knotknowing Diversity in Early Childhood (a research project reexamining “multicultural education” in an early years setting in London, UK), as generative examples of the potential of the entanglements observed during ethnographic research that take matter and materiality as their starting place.


Habit Affect matter Process ontology 


  1. Ahmed, S. (2004). The cultural politics of emotion. Edinburgh, Scotland: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Barad, K. (2003). Posthumanist performativity: Toward an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 28(3), 801–831.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bennett, J. (2010). Vibrant matter: A political ecology of things. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Biesta, G. (2007). Why “What Works” won’t work: Evidence-based practice and the democratic deficit in educational research. Educational Theory, 57(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bissell, D. (2012). Agitating the powers of habit: Towards a volatile politics of thought. Theory and Event, 15, 1. Accessed 09 Apr 17 at Scholar
  6. Blackman, L. (2012). Immaterial bodies affect, embodiment, mediation. London, England: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Braidotti, R. (2006). Transpositons: On nomadic ethics. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  8. Braidotti, R. (2013). The posthuman. Oxford: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  9. Brennan, T. (2004). The transmission of affect. Ithaca, Greece: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Cannella, G. S., Pérez, M. S., & Lee, I. F. (Eds.). (2015). Critical examinations of quality in childhood education and care: Regulation, disqualification, and erasure. New York, NY: Peter Lang. Scholar
  11. Cannella, G. S., & Soto, L. D. (2010). Childhoods: A handbook (rethinking childhood). New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishing.Google Scholar
  12. Clough, P. T. (2007). Introduction. In P. T. Clough (Ed.), The affective turn. Durham, UK: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dahlberg, G., Moss, P., & Pence, A. (1999/2013). Beyond quality in early childhood education and care: Languages of evaluation. London, England: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Dahlberg, G., & Moss, P. (2005). Ethics and politics of early childhood education (contesting Early Childhood). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Deleuze, G. (1994). Difference and repetition (P. Patton, Trans.). New York, NY: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Deleuze, G. (2013). Francis Bacon. London, England: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
  17. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia (B. Massumi, Trans.). London, England: Continuum.Google Scholar
  18. Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1994). What is philosophy? London, England: Verso Books.Google Scholar
  19. Department for Education. (2011). Supporting families in the foundation years. London, England: Crown Copyright.Google Scholar
  20. Department for Education. (2015). 2-year-old early education entitlement: Local authority guide. London, England: Crown Copyright.Google Scholar
  21. Dolphijn, R., & van der Tuin, I. (2012). New materialism: Interviews & cartographies. Ann Arbor, MI: Open University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Guillaume, L., & Hughes, J. (2011). Deleuze and the body. Edinburgh, Scotland: Edinburgh University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Haraway, D. J. (2016). Staying with the trouble: Making kin in the Chthulucene. London, England: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hickey-Moody, A. (2016). Manifesto: The rhizomatics of practice as research. In A. Hickey-Moody & T. Page (Eds.), Arts, pedagogy and cultural resistance: New materialisms (pp. 169–192). London, England: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
  25. Holmes, R., & Jones, L. (2016). Flickering, spilling and diffusing body/knowledge in the posthuman early years. In C. A. Taylor & C. Hughes (Eds.), Posthuman research practices in education (pp. 108–127). Hampshire, UK: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  26. Hroch, P. (2015). Deleuze, Guattari, and environmental pedagogy and politics: Ritournelles for a planet-yet-to-come. In M. Carlin & J. Wallin (Eds.), Deleuze and Guattari, politics and education: For a people-yet-to-come. London, England: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar
  27. Kirby, V. (1997). Telling flesh: The substance of the corporeal. New York, NY/London, England: Routledge.Google Scholar
  28. Knudsen, B. T., & Stage, C. (2015). Affective methodologies: Developing cultural research strategies for the study of affect. Hampshire, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lapworth, A. (2015). Habit, art, and the plasticity of the subject: The ontogenetic shock of the bioart encounter. Cultural Geographies, 22(1), 85–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Latour, B. (2004). Why has critique run out of steam? From matters of fact to matters of concern. Critical Inquiry, 30, 225–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Law, J. (2004). After method: Mess in social science research. London, England: Routledge.Google Scholar
  32. MacLure, M. (2013). The wonder of data. Cultural Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies, 13(4), 228–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. MacLure, M. (2015). ‘The New Materialisms’: Thorn in the flesh of critical qualitative inquiry? G.S. Cannella, M.S. Pérez, P.A. Pasque Critical qualitative inquiry: Foundations and futures. London, England: Routledge, 93–112. 2016.Google Scholar
  34. Malone, K. (2016). Children’s place encounters: place-based participatory research to design a child-friendly and sustainable urban development. Geographies of Global Issues: Change and Threat, Springer 9789814585538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Massumi, B. (1993). Politics of everyday fear. University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  36. Massumi, B. (1998). Event horizon. In J. Brouwer (Ed.), The art of the accident (pp. 154–168). Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Dutch Architecture Institute/V2.Google Scholar
  37. Massumi, B. (2002). A shock to thought: Expression after Deleuze and Guattari. London, England: Routledge.Google Scholar
  38. Mitchell, R. (2010). Bioart and the vitality of media. Seattle, WA: Washington University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Massumi, B. (2015). The politics of affect. London: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  40. Moss, P. (2014). Transformative Change and Real Utopias in Early Childhood Education: A story of democracy, experimentation and potentiality (Contesting Early Childhood). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  41. Moss, P. (2016). Towards a holistic approach to early childhood education. In C. Dalli & A. Meade (Eds.), Research, policy and advocacy in the early years: Writings inspired by the achievements of Anne smith (pp. 109–120). Wellington, New Zealand: NZCER.Google Scholar
  42. Olsson, L. M. (2009). Movement and experimentation in young children’s learning: Deleuze and Guattari in early childhood education. London, England: Routledge.Google Scholar
  43. Olsson, L. M., Dahlberg, G., & Theorell, E. (2015). Displacing identity – placing aesthetics: Early childhood literacy in a globalized world. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 37(5), 717–738.Google Scholar
  44. Rancière, J. (2001). Ten theses on politics. Theory & Event, 5(3.) Accessed on 13 Nov at
  45. Ravaisson, F. (2008). Of habit (C. Carlisle & M. Sinclair, Trans.). London, England: Continuum.Google Scholar
  46. Stengers, I. (2010). Cosmopolitics I. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  47. Stewart, K. (2007). Ordinary affects. London, England: Duke University press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Svirsky, M. (2015). BDS as a mediator. Literary and Cultural Studies, 41(2), 45–74.Google Scholar
  49. Taylor, A. (2013). Reconfiguring the natures of childhood (Contesting Early Childhood). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  50. Thrift, N. (2008). Non-representational theory: Space, politics, affect. London, England: Routledge.Google Scholar
  51. Wallin, J. (2013). Morphologies for a pedagogical life. In I. Semetsky & D. Masny (Eds.), Deleuze and education (pp. 196–214). Edinburgh, Scotland: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  52. Williams, J. (2013). Gilles Deleuze’s difference and repetition: A critical introduction and guide. Edinburgh, Scotland: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Wood, B. (2014). Making sense of no body. Journal of Creative Technologies, (1). Accessed 15 Nov 2017, at

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Manchester Metropolitan UniversityManchesterUK
  2. 2.Independent ScholarManchesterUK
  3. 3.Middlesex UniversityLondonUK

Section editors and affiliations

  • Paul Hart
    • 1
  • Phillip Payne
    • 2
  1. 1.Science EducationUniversity of ReginaReginaCanada
  2. 2.Monash UniversityMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations