{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.027879677182685254, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01173881144534116, 'mean_word_length': 5.314814814814815, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Advanced diarology: mortification, materiality and meaning-making

Public diary-reading events, arguably originating in the USA in 2002, continue to draw
participants eager to share their teenage angst and juvenilia, yet there is little scholarly
reflection on this peripheral practice of performative writing. Having birthed our own
version in 2017 within the safe harbour of the academy and using an intuitive,
practice-based methodology we believe there are some useful questions to pose about
the autoethnographic contributions of this mortification rite. Eighteen months in, we
are further moved to ask, what is happening in the presentational and performative
space as we show our younger selves to one another as we have, and do? This article,
a follow-up to our previous Diarology for beginners (2019), formally reiterates on the
page the associative leaps and communal meaning-making arising from our
explorations so far. Prompted by questions, such as, Is the practice of diary keeping
inherently gendered? Is it about becoming visible? Audible? Memorable? What? And
what is the impulse to publicly share the archives? (Munro, Murray and Taylor 2019),
we draw on the literature around diary keeping, as well as theories on voice, gender and
creative autoethnography, as a way into understanding diary performing and the public
sharing of juvenile shame.