University of Western Sydney, Australia

Literature Compass Special Issue: Life Writing and Critical Practice, 2011

Further Reading

Across the course of my research into issues of writing and representation and the affective power of research I have yet to come across a book that has affected me as much as Ruth Behar’s The Vulnerable Observer (1996). While the focus of the book rests with anthropology, Behar’s insights into the personal effects of research and fieldwork, and the line between the observer and the observed, are critical to contemporary studies involving the ‘writing of the other’. Behar’s book allowed me to rethink the auto/biographical divide and the processes and experiences that can inform the making of a biographical text.

Literary texts that deal, in part at least, with the affective qualities of biographical writing and/or the experience of unearthing the past are becoming more common. Richard Holmes’ seminal work Footsteps (1995) is well-known. Lesser-known but more contemporary works include Robert Dessaix’s Twilight in Love: Travels with Turgenev (2004) and Elif Batuman’s The Possessed (2010). While these works do not explicitly deal with methodology, they do point to the feverish qualities of past/present field relationships.

In general, the field of biographical writing and biographical narrativity is widening. As I have indicated elsewhere, autoethnography and studies in qualitative research have a great deal to offer those interested in issues of method. Beyond Behar, the work of Carolyn Ellis (1995, 1996, 2004), Rosanna Hertz (1994), Kim Etherington (2004) and P.A Atkinson, A Coffey, S Delamont, J Lofland and L Lofland (eds) (2001) is also recommended.

Syllabi

This article aims to stimulate debate around issues of biographical narrativity, methodology and the affective power of the biographical research experience. The essay emerges out of a larger study that explores the processes and experiences that inform the making of a biographical text in an attempt to understand the effects of those experiences on research and writing, and the production of biographical knowledge more broadly. ‘Writing Intimate Lives: Mediations in Biographical Praxis’ would benefit a unit or course interested in issues of writing and representation – both in biographical writing and in qualitative research more broadly. Questions that might emerge after reading might include: how do the specific circumstances in which we write affect what we write and how? How does our encounter with the biographical world come to be enacted in biographical writing? Is it true that biographical studies has tended to ‘police’ or over-determine representational modes and the relationship between the biographer and the subject? And how might we develop a way of thinking about biography that enables us to reflect upon the epistemological basis of our theory and practice, thereby expanding its field of significance?

In the 10 years since the events of September 2001 a vast amount of scholarly research has been written on the impact of 9/11. Wiley-Blackwell is pleased to share with you this collection of free book and journal content, featuring over 20 book chapters and 185 journal articles from over 200 publications, spanning subjects across the social sciences and humanities.

Simply click on your area of interest below to access this reading and learning resource today:

The Montreal International Poetry Prize will award $50,000 for a single poem in any style and in any English dialect. We will also produce an annual global poetry anthology – something curiously missing from our cultural environment.

To reflect its global perspective, the Montreal Prize has assembled an editorial board of accomplished poets from Australia, Canada, England, Guyana, India, Jamaica, Malawi, Nigeria, Northern Ireland and the US. These poets will select 50 poems for the competition’s shortlist, which will be published in a unique global poetry anthology, representing the very latest work from around the world. From these finalists, Andrew Motion will select the winner of the prize, to be announced after the anthology is published.

You can find out more about us at http://www.montrealprize.com, and you can read about it here at the Huffington Post and here at Poets & Writers.

The early entry deadline for the competition is April 22. The final entry deadline is July 8.

If you have any questions about the Montreal Prize,  contact lenepp@montrealprize.comy.

Communicating about Communication: Multidisciplinary Approaches to Educating Educators about Language Variation (pages 245–257)
Christine Mallinson and Anne H. Charity Hudley

Abstract | Full Article (HTML) | PDF(99K) | References

Beyond ‘Good’ and ‘Evil’: Breaking Down Binary Oppositions in Holocaust Representations of ‘Privileged’ Jews (pages 407–418)
Adam Brown

Abstract | Full Article (HTML) | PDF(92K) | References

Language and Communication in the Spanish Conquest of America (pages 491–502)
Daniel Wasserman Soler

Abstract | Full Article (HTML) | PDF(87K) | References

Equal Representation of Time and Space: Arno Peters’ Universal History (pages 718–729)
Stefan Müller

Abstract | Full Article (HTML) | PDF(168K) | References

Recycling Modernity: Waste and Environmental History
Tim Cooper

Abstract | Full Article (HTML) | PDF(86K) | References

A Hybrid Model of Moral Panics: Synthesizing the Theory and Practice of Moral Panic Research (pages 295–309)
Brian V. Klocke and Glenn W. Muschert

Abstract | Full Article (HTML) | PDF(105K) | References

Borderlands Studies and Border Theory: Linking Activism and Scholarship for Social Justice (pages 505–518)
Nancy A. Naples

Abstract | Full Article (HTML) | PDF(101K) | References
Cultural Sociology and Other Disciplines: Interdisciplinarity in the Cultural Sciences (pages 169–179)
Diana Crane

Abstract | Full Article (HTML) | PDF(90K) | References

Fertility and Inequality Across Borders: Assisted Reproductive Technology and Globalization (pages 466–475)
Eileen Smith-Cavros

Abstract | Full Article (HTML) | PDF(80K) | References

By Victoria Nesfield,

The European Society for the Study of English held its tenth international conference in Turin, Italy in August. The biennial conference, now in its twentieth year selects a different European city for each conference; ESSE-10 was the first time Italy has hosted the conference. With 800 delegates in attendance of 44 nationalities, ESSE-10 was an exciting meeting ground for academics worldwide whose research interests lie in literature, linguistics and the study of the English language.

Three Plenary Lectures were delivered, by Timothy Webb, Emeritus Professor of English at the University of Bristol, who spoke on ‘Editing Leigh Hunt’s Autobiography’; Catherine Belsey, Research Professor in English at Swansea University who presented on ‘Gendered Revenants’; and Maurizio Gotti, Professor of English Language and Translation at Universita di Bergamo, who delivered a lecture on ‘Building and Breaking Discursive Conventions in Academic Writing.’ 12 lectures nominated by National Associations and 12 round table discussions took place, along with nine poster presentations. The most substantial section of the conference was a series of 75 seminars covering a range of topics from Shakespearean and Elizabethan era works, to 21^st century literature, across themes as diverse as politics, historical testimony and science fiction, and covering a variety of modes of literary theory. Linguistic themes covered by the seminars, round tables and lectures included discussions on translation, teaching English, semantics, legal language and inter-cultural studies. Across a diverse and broad spectrum of literature and language themed discussions, several themes emerged as ‘conferences within conferences’, notably the array of Shakespeare discussions, legal language seminars, the relationship between Scotland and Italy in literary studies, and a significant theme of cultural studies.

The scale of the conference, along with the number of delegates made the orchestration and organisation a grand task, but the registration process was a well-run system. The maps, schedules and information packs, provided in blue satchels made delegates instantly recognisable all over Turin for the week of the conference, and gave the city an extra buzz of excitement and sense of participation for those involved. A conference of this size was bound to be accompanied by the obligatory technical hitches and delays, and it was. The seminars however, are designed to be informal events structured to generate debates and questions, and a few power-point issues did not hinder the discussions and the opportunities to network. The biggest logistical issue ESSE was forced to negotiate was the University layout, with the several campus buildings spread out across the city centre. It is unfortunate that the beautiful 18^th century Rectorate building could not have been used to accommodate more events, with the publishers’ book shops being housed in a separate campus to the opening day registration and evening reception in the Rectorate, and the welcome address in a third building. The distance between the buildings may have inhibited higher attendance at various seminars, lectures and round tables, but with the necessary room numbers and the building constraints, the University of Turin did it’s best to accommodate, with a large number of student guides on hand and organised bus transport between campuses throughout the conference. With seminars and discussions on a huge array of themes and subjects across the study of English literature and language, ESSE caters for a large academic area, and ESSE-10 provided an excellent opportunity to meet peers and engage with a vast and exciting academic field.

ESSE-11 will be held on the 4^th – 8^th September 2012, hosted by Istanbul, Turkey. The European Journal of English Studies (EJES) is published by ESSE in cooperation with Routledge.

ESSE website: http://www.essenglish.org/

There is, to reprise Avital Ronell, no off switch for the ‘post-human’. The call is always (for) you. It leaves you ringing.
—Julian Yates, “It’s (for) You; Or, the Tele-T/r/opical Post-human” (forthcoming in the inaugural issue of postmedieval)

I have been spending my holiday break in the final copy-editing throes for the inaugural issue of postmedieval: a journal of medieval cultural studies, slated for publication in April 2010, “When Did We Become Post/human?” My co-editor, Craig Dionne, and I decided to try something a little different here and asked contributors to write, not full-length, heavily footnoted scholarly articles, or even full-blown essays, but rather, to engage in short [3,000 or so words] riffs and ruminations on:

a) the possible productive intersections (of any type) between studies in earlier historical periods and ongoing discourses on the posthuman and posthumanism in the contemporary humanities and sciences;

b) how certain discourses of the pre- and early modern historical periods might problematize the assumptions of a posthumanism that considers itself to be either thoroughly modern or somehow outside of history;

c) the ways in which the history and culture of pre- and early modernity help us to address and perhaps adjudicate some of the troubling questions raised by contemporary discourses on the posthuman relative to issues of embodiment, subjectivity, cognition, sociality, free will, sexuality, spirituality, self-determination, expression, representation, well-being, ethics, moral responsibility, human and other rights, governance, technology, and the like.

For a while now, most discourses on the post/human and post/humanism have been undertaken by scholars in the humanities working in the most contemporary literary and other periods [Katherine Hayles, Cary Wolfe, Bruno Latour, Judith Halberstam, Donna Haraway, etc.] or by scientists working at the leading edge of biological, chemical, computing, and other research fields who often view the humanities in general as not adequate to the task of determining the future of the human. It is not that history is viewed as irrelevant to the question of the post/human, so much as it is seen as being somehow unprepared for the question, because the world is viewed, by some, as having changed, thanks to various technological and other innovations, to such a fundamental extent, that wholly new modes of thought and even ethical practice, are required. It is our hope, with this issue, to demonstrate that scholars working in what might be termed premodern periods [medievalists, but also early modernists] have much expertise to bring to bear upon the question of the post/human, in both its material and theoretical manifestations, and also in its implications for a future that could never be entirely free of a past that, in some ways, was more capacious and theoretically provocative in its post/humanisms and post/humanist thought than we generally allow. It is my [even greater] hope that this issue will also highlight the important value of premodern studies in the (new) spaces of deliberation over the future roles the humanities might play in what is likely still to be the all-too-human yet also post/human future. In addition to the 31 contributions from scholars working in medieval and early modern studies, there will also be 4 responses from Katherine Hayles, Kate Soper, Andy Mousley, and Noreen Giffney.

I will leave you here with some snippets from the essays in our inaugural issue, in order to hopefully encourage you to read the whole shebang when it finally arrives in its entirety. I should add here, first, that the inaugural issue will be entirely available and free online, and that four full essays [by Jeffrey J. Cohen, Karmen Mackendrick, Julie Singer, and Scott Maisano] will soon be available for free as a preview of the issue. And if you follow postmedieval on Twitter, you will receive issue updates and links to all of these.

SNIPPET PREVIEW — postmedieval, “When Did We Become Post/human?” (Vol. 1, Issue 1: April 2010):

Refigured by the call of the ‘post-human’, I argue that we find ourselves reterritorialized in questions of form, rhetoric, genre, and translation, understood now as ways of moving, ferrying, or shifting things (persons, concepts, plants, animals) between and among different spheres of reference. When, for example, Latour issues the call for new ‘speech impedimenta’ (Latour, 2004, 62-64) or ways of speaking, Stengers studies modes of scientific authorship (Stengers, 1997), Hayles surveys modes of embodiment or the poetics of electronic literature (Hayles, 2008), or Haraway asks us to think about the mediatizing of entities by way of critter-cams, duct tape, or agility sports for the dog/person companion species (Haraway, 2001; 2008), we are being invited to try out new rhetorical and technical means by which to transform noise into news of an other. Taking the tele-t/r/opical call of the ‘post-human’ means, for us, I think, being prepared to understand our expertise in these terms, and so configuring the textual traces named ‘past’ as an archive or contact zone which may offer occluded or discarded ways of being. –Julian Yates, “It’s (for) You; Or, the Tele-T/r/opical Post-human”

The notion that we have always been natural-born cyborgs has important consequences for cultural historians. What is now often called posthumanism (together with the related viewpoint known as transhumanism), and which is predominantly — often sensationally — associated with the new forms of bioengineering that seamlessly integrate humans and intelligent machines, is not therefore an apocalyptic break with previous ideas of ‘the human’, but part of a continuum that encompasses the entire history of ‘the human’. Think of this temporal recalibration as one way of slashing the post/human: in this schema, the ‘post’ is simultaneously present, future and past, and the past is correspondingly folded into the ‘post’ — and the ‘human’ is decisively relocated as an entity distinct from the Enlightenment ideal of ‘Man’, though not perhaps in the ways in which Donna Haraway and Cary Wolfe imagine that relocation (Haraway, 1990; Wolfe, 1995). For we are talking here less about the forms of hybridization that Haraway invokes (organism/machine, human/animal, physical/non-physical) or about Wolfe’s quite proper concerns about ‘what kinds of couplings across the humanist divide are possible’ (Wolfe, 1995, 66) than about rethinking the architecture of the mind as it engages with an external environment. Because cultural historians shy away from the idea that anything is ‘natural-born’, it’s important to appreciate that Clark’s model is anything but a recuperation of the universal, liberal humanist subject: it fully recognizes historically-contingent forms of ‘mindware’ upgrading. The task for a newly reconfigured cultural studies is to explore these forms — and to ask, given the bias amongst some scientists and ‘third culture’ thinkers against history, what history might add to our understanding of embedded cognition. –Ruth Evans, “Our Cyborg Past: Medieval Artificial Memory as Mindware Upgrade”

[Katherine Hayles's] How We Became Posthuman matches its rhetoric to its argument by highlighting anxiety in its cybernetic subjects as we face the prospect of disembodied humanity. Medievalists should be sympathetic since embodiment is key to the conception of full medieval personhood. Hayles reacted against a new desire to loosen the link of person to body and much speculative thinking continues to push in this direction. As contemporary science fiction shows, we can conceive a variety of technological advances that might allow intelligence to exist electronically and humans to become increasingly independent of their bodies. While some form of materiality and localized perspective seem necessary, in the future a person will be identified less by materiality or information than by understanding. The ability to recognize a being as a durable, comprehensible interlocutor will be the litmus test of the posthuman being. –David Gary Shaw, “Embodiment and the Human from Dante through Tomorrow”

Katherine Hayles’s more recent work poses the question of pre/present/post- humanness as such: How does the body know time? (Hayles, 2008). This is an inquiry applicable in so many senses to our rapidly evolving moment as we click through, log on, and interface (emphasis here on our tendency still to privilege new modes of media as space/place, not time). But it is also a question that re-frames the question of what time can mean — in time and as time. And here we may have something timely, something new. Is it possible that critical conversations surrounding the field of new media provide new affordances for an affective reading of time as embodiment? Can these registers of affective mediation speak to what potential we might conjure in doing history? As such, how does the body know time? How does time know the body? –Jen Boyle, “Biomedia in the Time of Animation”

In this article for the inaugural issue of a new journal that strives to develop a present-minded medieval studies, I want to experiment with the pleasure of trying to let what is arguably the newest of academic fields (the first issue of the new journal Transgender Studies Quarterly will come out later than the first issue of postmedieval) speak to one of the oldest. By finding its single moment of transgendered content in William Langland’s late fourteenth-century allegory Piers Plowman, this article cannot claim to find an ancestry for contemporary transsexuals. At best, it can gesture, with the rest of this journal, towards the multiple intersecting temporalities able to co-exist and, contingently, to meet, when medievalists keep both past and present in their heads at the same time. In doing so, I hope to pass some spark of excitement between that which is marginal because long dead and gone, and that which is marginal because subject to incomprehension and oppression. The term ‘transgendered’, like the term ‘queer’, is a term conceived broadly enough to potentially include medieval people: a certain percentage of persons who describe themselves with this term live either in-between genders or in some other complex relationship with the binary of male and female. As consequence, the term ‘transgender’ has an ambivalent relationship to twenty-first-century medical technology and is more open to appropriation by and about those not entirely interpellated by its power, including, potentially, medieval people. The drawback of such an appropriation, as with that of the term ‘queer’ is that it’s an easy label that can be diluted to the point of meaninglessness, a caution that shadows my every utterance. –Masha Raskolnikov, “Transgendering Pride”

However irregularly, intermittently, or incompletely, contemporary dramatic performance increasingly refuses to be cast as print’s ‘other’. The signifying forms of writing often seem less to direct the ‘languages of the stage’ than to provide one channel, and often not the dominant channel, of the discourse of theatrical performance. Theatre illustrates N. Katherine Hayles’ critique of the epistemology of ‘information’; rather than taking the stage for the site of the mere reproduction of the text’s ‘information’ — as though the text inscribed ‘information’ as ‘a free-floating, decontextualized, quantifiable entitity’ (Hayles, 1999, 59) — contemporary performance openly treats dramatic writing as an instrument that will be changed in the information it conveys by the means of its performance. Of course, to consider Shakespeare performance in this way raises the question of whether it is — or ought to be — conceived as a specific genre, in which performance properly works to decant textual ‘information’ by other means. This is, conventionally, the humanist, ‘stage-centered’ vision of Shakespeare performance, and of dramatic theatre more widely; it is, incidentally, a vision of dramatic performance often shared — though differently valued — in performance studies, too. What’s striking is how laminated this understanding is to a narrow understanding of the uses of print, and of the terms of literary value and the practices of hegemony associated with print culture. For regardless of whether or not Shakespeare ‘invented the human’, the technologies of being human — definitively, the technologies of writing, but also the conventions of acting, the framing practices of theatrical production — are now quite differently disposed, and instrumentalize the constitution and performance of the subject in different ways. –W.B. Worthen, “Posthuman Shakespeare Performance Studies”

Keep an eye out for this great special issue coming soon in Literature Compass! The line-up is as follows:

“Scholarly Editing in the Twenty-First Century” – Preface’, Regenia Gagnier, Literature Compass 6 (2009), 10.1111/j.1741-4113.2009.00672.x

“Scholarly Editing in the Twenty-First Century” – Introduction’, Arthur F. Marotti, Literature Compass 6 (2009), 10.1111/j.1741-4113.2009.00673.x

‘Electronic Archives and Critical Editing’, Jerome McGann, Literature Compass 6 (2009), 10.1111/j.1741-4113.2009.00674.x

‘Theorizing the Digital Scholarly Edition’, Hans Walter Gabler, Literature Compass 6 (2009), 10.1111/j.1741-4113.2009.00675.x

‘Editing Without Walls’, Peter Robinson, Literature Compass 6 (2009), 10.1111/j.1741-4113.2009.00676.x

‘Our Affection for Books’, Susan J. Wolfson, Literature Compass 6 (2009), 10.1111/j.1741-4113.2009.00677.x

‘His Days Among the Dead Are No Longer Passed: Editing Robert Southey’, Lynda Pratt, Literature Compass 6 (2009), 10.1111/j.1741-4113.2009.00678.x

‘Different Demands, Different Priorities: Electronic and Print Editions’, Stuart Curran, Literature Compass 6 (2009), 10.1111/j.1741-4113.2009.00679.x

‘Editing Manuscripts in Print and Digital Forms’, Arthur F. Marotti, Literature Compass 6 (2009), 10.1111/j.1741-4113.2009.00680.x

‘All of the Above: The Importance of Multiple Editions of Renaissance Manuscripts’, Steven W. May, Literature Compass 6 (2009), 10.1111/j.1741-4113.2009.00681.x

‘Editing Early Modern Women’s Manuscripts:  Theory, Electronic Editions, and the Accidental Copy-Text’, Margaret J.M. Ezell, Literature Compass 6 (2009), 10.1111/j.1741-4113.2009.00682.x

‘Different Strokes, Same Folk: Designing the Multi-form Digital Edition’, Daniel Paul O’Donnell, Literature Compass 6 (2009), 10.1111/j.1741-4113.2009.00683.x

“Scholarly Editing in the Twenty-First Century” – A Conclusion’, Laura Mandell, Literature Compass 6 (2009), 10.1111/j.1741-4113.2009.00684.x

“Scholarly Editing in the Twenty-First Century” – Combined Bibliography’, Marotti et al., Literature Compass 6 (2009), 10.1111/j.1741-4113.2009.00685.x

—————————-

Image source: Jef Poskanzer, Wikimedia Commons

There will be no new content uploaded to the site after Friday 30th October, but there is still much to discuss. All of the presentations and comments will remain on the website indefinitely, and we’d encourage you all to keep engaging with the content so long as there are issues to be explored, and interdisciplinary barriers to be broken down! If you sign up to receive email alerts of new comments, you can keep up with any ongoing conversations.

We sincerely hope you have enjoyed the conference – here are some things that you can do to stay in touch:

• Check out the Compass journals and recommend to your librarian. Researchers, teaching faculty, and advanced students will all benefit from the accessible, informative articles that provide overviews of current research. Personal subscriptions are now also available.
• Complete the post-conference opinion survey, coming to you next week. Your thoughts will help us make decisions about future conferences.
• If you have suggestions, or even just a short comment, you can pop it in our Suggestion Box or Email us
• Access the Publishing Workshops and Keynotes via iTunes (as from the conference website). The raw feed for the podcasts can be found here.
• Share our keynote video lectures via our Vimeo channel
• Tell others about your experience of the conference!

Final reminder: your 20% book discount token is valid until 15th November, so visit the book exhibit before then.

Until next time…?

Thanks again,

The Compass Team
www.blackwell-compass.com

Today marked the penultimate day of Wiley-Blackwell’s first Virtual Conference. As I am sure you will all agree, thus far, each day has contained many gems, and today has been no different. Eileen Joy’s (Southern Illinois University Edwardsville) keynote lecture: ‘Reading Beowulf in the Ruins of Grozny: Pre/modern, Post/human, and the Question of Being‐Together’ looks at the aftermath of the Russian bombing of Chechnya through the lens of Beowulf.

The two final papers of the conference were provided by P. Grady Dixon (Mississippi State University) & Adam J Kalkstein (United States Military Academy) and Nicole Mathieu (CNRS, University of Paris). Their papers respectively entitled: ‘Climate–Suicide Relationships: A Research Problem in Need of Geographic Methods and Cross‐Disciplinary Perspectives’ and ‘Constructing an interdisciplinary concept of sustainable urban milieu’ have looked at indisciplinarity from a geographical and environmental perspective. The final publishing workshop was ‘How to Survive the Review Process’ by Greg Maney (Hofstra University).

Although, the conference is due to end tomorrow it is not too late to register and take advantage of the book discount and free journal access. Each of the papers and podcasts will remain on the website, and it is hoped that you will keep the comments coming in.

Day eight of the conference was once again marked by some excellent contributions. The first paper ‘Cultural Sociology and Other Disciplines: Interdisciplinarity in the Cultural Sciences’ by Diane Crane (University of Pennsylvania) suggests that for many scholars ‘disciplinary isolation is the norm.’ However, Crane proposes that by utilising what she describes as ‘free‐floating paradigms’ such barriers can be removed.

The second paper of the day by Christine Mallinson, (University of Maryland) entitled ‘Sociolinguistics and Sociology: Current Directions, Future Partnerships’ also takes sociology and interdisciplinarity as its main themes. Mallinson’s paper concludes with practical advice as to how best to achieve research partnerships.

Together with these exciting papers, Catherine Sanderson (Amherst College) offered advice in her publishing workshop: ‘The Joys and Sorrows of Writing an Undergraduate Textbook.’ There was also an opportunity to spend time in the Second Life cocktail bar with the Compass Team.

The seventh day of the conference has continued with the key themes of ‘breaking down boundaries’ and interdisciplinarity. Roy Baumeister (Florida State University) began the day with his keynote lecture entitled ‘Human Nature and Culture: What is the Human Mind Designed for?’ By utilising the concepts of evolutionary and cultural psychology, Buameister is able to explore the intrinsic significance culture holds for humanity.

Two other papers were also presented today. ‘Text as It Happens: Literary Geography’ by Sheila Hones (University of Tokyo) and Stefan Müller’s (University of Duisburg‐Essen) ‘Equal Representation of Time and Space: Arno Peters’ Universal History.’ These contributions have utilised a wide and diverse range of disciplines including history, cartography, geography and literature. Finally, Devonya Havis’ publishing workshop entitled ‘Teaching with Compass’ offers some interesting ideas as to how best implement technology within the classroom.

Welcome to the second week of the Wiley-Blackwell Virtual Conference. The first day back has started with a keynote speech from Peter Ludlow (Northwestern University) entitled ‘Virtual Communities, Virtual Cultures, Virtual Governance.’ Conference delegates also had the opportunity to meet Peter at the Second Life Cocktail Bar.

There were two other papers on Monday’s session Adam Brown’s (Deakin University): ‘Beyond ‘Good’ and ‘Evil’: Breaking Down Binary Oppositions in Holocaust Representations of ‘Privileged’ Jews’ and ‘A Hybrid Model of Moral Panics: Synthesizing the Theory and Practice of Moral Panic Research’ presented by Brian V. Klocke (State University of New York, Plattsburgh) & Glenn Muschert (Miami University). In addition Wiley-Blackwell’s Vanessa Lafaye held a publishing workshop entitled ‘The Secret to Online Publishing Success.’

As you can see, this week promises to be as exciting and innovative as the previous one. All of the papers and workshops from last week are still available to download from the conference site, and both the ‘battle of the bands’ and the opportunity to contribute a ‘winning comment’ remain.

The first week of the conference has come to an end, and the final day has included two exciting papers, as well as a publishing workshop. The first paper entitled ‘Full Disclosure of the “Raw Data” of Research on Humans: Citizens’ Rights, Product Manufacturer’s Obligations and the Quality of the Scientific Database’ was presented by Dennis Mazur (Oregon Health and Sciences University). In his lecture, Mazur highlights the difficult and contentious issues involved in human testing, particularly the tensions between participants and drug manufacturers.

The second paper also takes an interdisciplinary approach to medical matters. Eileen Smith‐Cavros (Nova Southeastern University) lecture entitled ‘Fertility and Inequality Across Borders: Assisted Reproductive Technology and Globalization’ looks at the emotive issue of assisted reproduction. By surveying existing literature, Smith Cavros is able to look in detail at some of the many issues which impact upon reproduction.

Together with these two papers, Duane Wegener’s (Purdue University) publishing workshop: ‘Top 10 mistakes New Scholars Make When Trying to Get Published’ marked the end of the first week.

Enjoy the weekend and we look forward to seeing you next week.

Today’s papers have focused once more on the key motifs of the conference, that of breaking down borders and indisciplinarity. Nancy Naples (University of Connecticut) uses her paper: ‘Borderlands Studies and Border Theory: Linking Activism and Scholarship for Social Justice’ to highlight just some of the difficulties faced when ‘negotiate[ing] different disciplinary frames, methods, and theoretical assumptions in order to move forward toward collaborative problem solving’.

The second paper today entitled ‘Theorizing Borders in a ‘Borderless World’: Globalization, Territory and Identity’ was presented by Alexander Diener (Pepperdine University) and Joshua Hagen (Marshall University). The authors question the assumption that world is becoming increasingly borderless, instead suggesting that state borders continue to ‘remain one of the most basic and visible features of the international system.’

Finally, on the third day of the conference Kivmars Bowling (Wiley-Blackwell) has presented a particularly relevant publishing workshop entitled ‘The Online Author’s Survival Guide’. The daily book prize was awarded to Maeve O’Donovan for her comment on David Crystal’s keynote lecture and the conference day ended in the Second Life cocktail bar.

The second day of the conference has been filled with three more interesting and innovative papers. David Crystal’s (University of Bangor) keynote lecture entitled ‘Language Death: A Problem for All’ highlights the troubling statistics that ‘96% of the world’s languages are spoken by just 4% of the people’. Given the interdisciplinary nature, and the methodology of this virtual conference, Crystal’s paper draws attention to the use of language as a way to ‘break down barriers’.

The two other papers presented today relate to disability, albeit with very different approaches. The first was given by Wendy Turner (Augusta State University) and is entitled: ‘Human Rights, Royal Rights and the Mentally Disabled in Late Medieval England.’ In her paper Turner suggests that modern preconceptions of medieval disability are not generally supported by the empirical evidence. The second paper ‘The Status of the Learning Disabled in Philosophy of Mind and Disability Studies’ by Maeve M. O’Donovan (College of Notre Dame of Maryland), approaches the subject of learning disability through personal and academic experience and research.

As well, as the ongoing ‘battle of the bands’ competition – plenty of time still to vote! – today also saw the first ‘winning comment’ prize awarded to Rebecca Wheeler.

Welcome to the first day of the 2009 Compass Interdisciplinary Virtual Conference. Regenia Gagnier (University of Exeter) opened the conference by asking: ‘Why Interdisciplinarity?’ As part of her introductory remarks, Professor Gagnier discusses the definitions of Interdisciplinarity, as well as outlining some of the benefits of interdisciplinary research and praxis.

Roger Griffin’s (Oxford Brookes University) keynote paper: ‘The Rainbow Bridge’: Reflections on Interdisciplinarity in the Cybernetic Age’ highlights the opportunities offered by the novel concept of a virtual conference. By reflecting on his own research into fascism, Griffin recognises the need to make cross-disciplinary connections, or as he describes it academics operating ‘flexibly as both splitters and lumpers, according to the situation’.

Two other conference papers have been presented today. The first ‘Communicating about Communication – Multidisciplinary Approaches to Educating Educators about Language Variation’ by Anne H. Charity Hudley (The College of William and Mary) and Christine Mallinson (University of Maryland, Baltimore County) and the second
‘Language and Communication in the Spanish Conquest of America’ by Daniel Wasserman Soler(University of Virginia).

Finally, Professor of Human Geography, Mike Bradshaw (University of Leicester) has contributed a Publishing Workshop entitled ‘Why Write a Review Paper? And how to do it!’. As well as all of these academic gems, conference delegates have also taken the opportunity to meet the speakers in Second Life and cast their votes in the ‘Battle of the Bands’.

We are delighted to announce that the program for the first ever Compass Interdisciplinary Virtual Conference is now available!

PDF DOWNLOADS:

Full Conference Program

‘At A Glance’ Conference Program – 1 Page

Conference paper abstracts and commentators

Author and Commentator Profiles

Keynote Speaker Profiles

In addition to the conference papers and keynote addresses, we will be offering a series of publishing workshops, ‘Meet the Keynote Speaker’ Q&A sessions, a book exhibit, musical entertainment and a SecondLife cocktail bar.

SOUNDS INTERESTING! HOW CAN I PARTICIPATE?

Join the conversation – we already have over 800 registered delegates from over 70 countries attending!

• Register for free at:
  http://www.blackwellpublishingsurvey.com/survey/149278/29a8.

• Delegates will be able to buy ANY Wiley book with a 20% conference discount.

• Delegates will be eligible for 60 days free online access to over 200 Wiley-Blackwell journals.

• Delegates providing feedback after the conference will also be in the running to win a year’s subscription to a Compass Journal of their choice!

We look forward to welcoming you to this inaugural virtual conference!

- The Compass Conference Team

Rochelle Lieber (Language and Linguistics Compass Editor-in-Chief)
Felice Lifshitz (History Compass Editor-in-Chief)
Jerry Suls (Social and Personality Psychology Compass Editor-in-Chief)
Vanessa Lafaye, Helen Ashton, Kivmars Bowling, Liam Cooper, Philip Smith (Wiley-Blackwell)

Questions? Feedback? Email: compassconference@wiley.com

Seminar invitation to Early Career Researchers to submit proposals to be included in a one day seminar, ‘As Others See Us’ on Saturday, 12 December 2009 at University of Exeter.

Deadline : Thursday, 15 October 2009.

As part of an AHRC funded research network that includes participants from the University of Plymouth (which is leading the network), the University of Exeter, Amherst College, and Simmons College in Boston MA, we would like invite a small number of early career researchers from literary studies, architecture and material culture, and art history to submit abstracts.

The purpose of the seminar is to explore ways in which we might re-evaluate the cultural interaction between Britain and New England 1600-1900 in a collection of essays.

The outcome will be a book proposal to put to Ashgate, who have expressed interest in this project. There will also be time set aside on the day to consider the international conference planned for Plymouth in July 2010, and to discuss the setting up of a UK Centre for New England studies. Contributors from the US and the UK will outline some of research resources available.

We invite new researchers to submit to Vivien Minton, Project Officer (vivien.minton@plymouth.ac.uk) the following as a Microsoft word attachment:
1. A three hundred word abstract of an essay relevant to the focus of this research network
2. A one page CV, including publications .

Please head your proposal ‘Seminar’.

Successful applicants will have their travelling expenses paid. In the event of there being more excellent proposals than we have space to include, we shall invite individuals to submit their proposals in response to the call for papers for the international Transatlantic Exchanges conference which we are arranging for July 2010 and for which an announcement will be made separately.

Many thanks,

Viv

Vivien Minton
Project Officer
Separateness and Kinship: Transatlantic Exchanges
Between Britain and New England, 1600-1900
University Of Plymouth
vivien.minton@plymouth.ac.uk