Old Email Archive

digest 2000-10-10 #001.txt

11:19 PM 10/9/00 -0700
From: "Society for Literature & Science" 
Daily SLS Email Digest

-> Continuing wrap up
     by richard nash 
-> Re: Continuing wrap up (fwd)
     by Sue Hagedorn 

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 9 Oct 2000 11:59:20 -0700
From: richard nash 
Subject: Continuing wrap up

If my memory is correct, the address I am sending this message to
connects
to a generally moribund electronic discussion list of sls members.  If
my
memory is faulty, this message will either disappear or confuse whoever
receives it.

In the hopes that we might build on the recently concluded annual
meeting
by developing some ongoing discussion, I am making use of the e-mail
discussion list as something that might be considered "middle-aged
media"--no longer new and not yet old, this medium seems (for our
organization at least) to constitute a "forgotten generation" of
technology.

The most obvious application that occurs to me is to continue the
conversation begun face-to-face in Atlanta.  Several of the suggestions
and concerns aired in that session are perenniel ones that seem to
occupy
us regularly, but one large issue seems to me to be emerging and
challenging us in a variety of ways: the role of technology in our
field.

One of the real strengths of this year's meeting, in my opinion, was the
showcasing of the exciting possibilities sometimes demonstrated by new
media
and emerging technologies.  One of the real weaknesses, in my opinion,
was
the lessening of attention paid to the material costs exacted by those
excitements.  Both those strengths and weakness can be characterized in
much fuller detail, but I want to focus here on a specific challenge
that
was articulated during this conference, and offer a modest proposal that
occurred to me in the past 24 hours.

The challenge that I am thinking about can be framed something like
this:
to the extent that literature and science constitutes a field of
inquiry,
it seems to be a field that will increasingly be characterized in the
immediate future by attention to what is animating (often quite
literally)
the high-tech horizon; at the same time, however, the actual costs of
staging this kind of work is rapidly growing beyond the reach of this
none-too-wealthy academic organization.  How then are we going to
continue
to address issues in the field without incurring prohibitive cost
overruns
at the annual meeting.

One suggestion at the wrap-up was a technology fee
surcharge for multi-media presentations (I confess I am not clear if
this
would refer to all AV devices, or only some, or if a sliding scale would
need to be developed to distinguish between different levels of
technological sophistication).  Perhaps this is a solution, but I am not
fully convinced that it is one that will prove ultimately satisfying.
Another suggestion made at the wrap-up, in an unrelated context, was the
reminder that "Workshop" sessions--in which a paper is circulated in
advance of the meeting--should be encouraged.  Thinking about this on
the
way home, I began imagining the workshop as a possible partial solution
to
our technology challenges.  The proposal I sketch below depends on the
success of several undertakings, and may well be liable to objections
that
I am too short-sighted (or too visionary) to see; any response will be
appreciated.  I call this proposal (out of respect to Frankenstein, and
for reasons that will become obvious) "The Workshop of Filthy Creation":

It seems to me that if our initiative to get an SLS website
up-and-running
early is successful, that the conference planning committee could create
separate links from that page to multimedia presentations that would be
the basis for workshop sessions at the conference itself.  Instead of
bringing our technology to the conference location, where the host site
will charge us a hefty users fee to access it, can't we make our more
elaborate presentations accessible via the web?  Can't some of our
members
with expertise in distance learning be of special assistance to us here
in
making such a component viable?  Indeed, I can't help thinking that
based
on some of the presentations that I saw in Atlanta, a web-page that made
such presentations available to members only might very well do more to
expand the membership of sls than either the conference or the journal.
It is quite possible that what I am imagining is not feasible, but it
seems to me that much of the media on display in Atlanta might be more
manageably accessed via the web BEFORE we come together than via the
hotel
on site.

Richard Nash
Indiana U.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 9 Oct 2000 18:48:58 -0700
From: Sue Hagedorn 
Subject: Re: Continuing wrap up (fwd)

Richard:

Just a few comments--I hate to be a wet blanket on your enthusiastic
ideas,
but I forsee many problems.  However, I hope your message shakes
something
up in the membership and that we can all be working to address the
problem.
 Good job going first!

>>If my memory is correct, the address I am sending this message to
connects
>>to a generally moribund electronic discussion list of sls members.  If
my
>>memory is faulty, this message will either disappear or confuse
whoever
>>receives it.

No, actually I read every item that comes from this list--but it has
been
getting rather unused recently.  Is everyone as overworked as I feel?
Hopefully your message will get something going in a moderate way.  We
need
more discussion than is now out there, but none of us need the 50-100
messages a day that come with "hot" listservs!

>>e-mail discussion list as something that might be considered
"middle-aged
>>media"

I like this designation!  I'm most comfortable with multi-overheads, but
by
necessity I'm learning to use power point most of the time.

>>One suggestion at the wrap-up was a technology fee
>>surcharge for multi-media presentations (I confess I am not clear if
this
>>would refer to all AV devices, or only some, or if a sliding scale
would
>>need to be developed to distinguish between different levels of
>>technological sophistication).

Actually, more than one society I belong to does this--it is on a
sliding
scale of about $10-15 for overheads, $25-30 for more complex technology.
I'd probably go for this--last year my presentation was strongly visual.
To use overheads (an "outdated" technology, according to my department)
would have cost me about $50, at a minimum.  I'd have gone that high to
subsidize the powerpoint presentation I did use.  (The department is
really
serious about the "outdated" label--when I teach in a computer
classroom, I
have to "steal" an overhead from another classroom not so "updated"!)

>>Another suggestion made at the wrap-up, in an unrelated context, was
the
>>reminder that "Workshop" sessions--in which a paper is circulated in
>>advance of the meeting--should be encouraged.  Thinking about this on
the
>>way home, I began imagining the workshop as a possible partial
solution to
>>our technology challenges.

I could support doing this in a limited manner.  I basically prepare
presentations as opposed to writing papers.  A paper may be written
sometime in the future--if I have the time to get around to it or even
if I
decide to continue in that direction of research after getting feedback
at
the meeting.  I think one of the strengths of SLS is that it is a
friendly
medium where we can present some unfinished works--and written papers
can
work against that.  Also, many of us are always working several weeks
behind where we should be--I don't think I'm alone in reworking my
presentation the night--or even noontime--before I present it!

One of my greatest fears of this format is that it will lead to further
reading during sessions--people might forget to read the original on the
web, perhaps because they are working on their own presentations or
because
they are working ahead to make room in the schedule even to come to the
meeting.  Also, many people change their minds about what session they
are
going to attend once they arrive.  With an unprepared audience, it will
lead to repeating the main points--and since many are uneasy about
speaking
in front of a group or have trouble thinking on their feet, this could
lead
back to a reading of the original.  And just reading is DEADLY--boring
to
the audience and nerve-wracking to the reader (what if the notes are
dropped?)

I like the idea of the image-rich material being on the web, but for
many
of the reasons above, I don't know if it will work unless most of us
start
bringing laptops with us and accessing the web perhaps the night before
a
session.  Maybe instead of posting on the web, it might be cheaper for
SLS
to, instead of expensive equipment rental, to the early morning before
presentations run off some color prints of the material.  (No, don't
EVER
ask me to be the gopher or organizer for THAT meeting--instant
insanity!)

>>It seems to me that if our initiative to get an SLS website
up-and-running
>>early is successful, that the conference planning committee could
create
>>separate links from that page to multimedia presentations that would
be
>>the basis for workshop sessions at the conference itself.

This could work, if most of us worked ahead and were ready for our
presentations at least a month ahead of time.  It would make my life
easier, but unfortunately that doesn't describe me!  As we saw this
week,
even getting an abstract book--or even links to the program on the
web--was
extremely difficult.  Adding a further major responsibility to the
organizer (and believe me, this would be major), might assure us of more
insanity than usual!

I think posting papers ahead of time could work well--but on a VERY
limited
basis--at most one or two sessions because of the logistics involved.

Another major obstacle was brought up in the wrap-up session by Bernice.
She's also here at Va. Tech--she is right that putting material up on
the
web can greatly endanger copyrights.  All grad students here now are
required to post their theses and dissertations in PDF form to the web.
(In some cases, access can be blocked for a time--but there is no strong
guarantee that this block will be honored past the current year's time.
And knowing the sloppiness with which some of these matters are handled,
I
forsee legal problems.)  Already some past students have been told by
major
publishers that putting material up on the web constituted "prior
publication," and so subsequent articles/books could not be published!
Even password protection isn't total protection from these problems. 
(And
if the works are hidden behind a password, we won't attract new members
this way.)

>>Indeed, I can't help thinking that based
>>on some of the presentations that I saw in Atlanta, a web-page that
made
>>such presentations available to members only might very well do more
to
>>expand the membership of sls than either the conference or the
journal.

I agree--but perhaps in an after-the-fact (selective) posting on the web
would be more feasible.  Members would have to be careful about what was
posted so as not to give away rights without being aware of it.

>>It is quite possible that what I am imagining is not feasible,

Again, I hate to be a spoil sport, but I can see this turning into a
logistic nightmare.  But then I'm one of those who always feels as if
they
are running to catch up--perhaps this is a rarer character deficit than
I
think it is.  (Most other people SEEM to be more collected than I feel.)
At least, though, you had the courage to start the discussion, and I
thank
you!

Sue H.

Susan A. Hagedorn
English Department
Virginia Tech
Blacksburg, Va.  24061-0012
hagedors@vt.edu
540/231-4748