owlfish: (Default)
Add MemoryShare This Entry
posted by [personal profile] owlfish at 10:22pm on 07/05/2006
One perennially unobtainable goal at the medieval congress is enough sleep. Receptions last well into the evening and it's so easy to be sidetracked talking to a new acquaintance or long-lost friend when otherwise en route to sleep. So my Saturday began very nicely with a nap, a fine start to a very good day.

After buying a modest two books at the bookroom, I ran off to the Avista business meeting. If any of you work on food technologies in the Middle Ages, do let me know - I'm now organizing a session for Avista on it for next year.

The afternoon was fabulous: how could I resist a panel comprised of Chris Given-Wilson and Terry Jones? Neither could several hundred other people. I perched on a step. Given-Wilson is hilarious, and argued, among other things, that the Wilton Diptych* is a paean to virginity - everyone depicted in it is a virgin. This logically led to speculation on what the collective noun for a group of virgins might be. Also, "Richard" was a name only given to younger sons - it wasn't a kingly name. Jones spoke with alarming rapidity, but his well-labeled Powerpoint was easy to follow: Richard II was a good, responsible monarch, and all this talk about being a tyrant is besmirchment by Henry IV. Afterwards, there was wild applause, and then a book signing.

A year ago, in the late hours in the night which were contributing to last year's lack of sleep, Elisabeth Carnell and I hatched plans for a weblog session at this year's Kalamazoo. On Saturday afternoon, six panellists**, one moderator, and a good twenty-four-or-so audience members*** I'm not the best person to tell you how the panel went since I was moderating, and it was my first time chairing a session. But I can tell you that the roundtable participants were forthcoming, satisfyingly opinionated, and didn't require too much prompting to keep the dialogue going. We made it through all the most important questions I wanted to deal with****, and kept the discussion fairly well focused on weblog use as it pertains to medievalists and medieval studies in particular. There was clearly a great deal of interest in the pedagogical uses of weblogs.

We knew there'd be plenty of bloggers in the audience. Meeting Baraita was one of the unexpected highlights for me - and, of course, the pleasure of meeting the roundtable participants I didn't already know. Afterwards, I wandered briefly over to wine hour - where I ran into [livejournal.com profile] childeric. C.M. and I were en route over to nab seats for the Pseudo Society when S.W. pulled up in a car. Thanks to him, dinner was civilized and quick at an all-you-can-eat salad, baked goods, soup, and ice cream bar. The cheese biscuits***** were really good. We still managed to get some of the last groups of seats, a block way up in the very front row, where I chatted with History Geek and Digital Medievalist Project members until the evening's entertainment got underway.

For those who have not previously encountered it, the Pseudo Society is an annual tradition at Kalamazoo. It's a session of all fake papers, delivered with straight faces and - when successful - designed to be really funny. "The Sentinel's Tale: A Chaucerian Forgery by a Post-Post-Chaucerian Forger" was full of good puns, mostly related to shoes. "The Passions of Thomas Becket" included alcohol, sailing, fishing, and massage. It was funnier than my summary makes it sound. The image documenting massage was a highlight; also, Becket using a human cannon and shooting out into the air. As for the last paper... well... I laughed a few times and completely failed to get the rest of it; this says a great deal about my lack of immersion in critical theory.

I tired early at the dance, but not before catching up with lots of the Toronto crowd, meeting more of the UCLA crowd, bonded with [livejournal.com profile] dark_age_gal over gaming, and appreciating the coconut notes in [livejournal.com profile] ballincollig's BPAL-of-the-day.

* Because no study of Richard II is complete without a new suggestion for the meaning of the Diptych.
** H.D. Miller was, sadly, unable to join us, thanks to a family emergency.
*** At least one of whom kept wanting to post comments in reply to things which had been said.
**** Does blogging provide an effective form of personal publicity? Do you wish you'd chosen to blog anonymously instead of under your own name? What does the medium of blogging do better for Medieval Studies than forums, discussion boards, and other types of web-based interaction? Why is there so much more blogging about academics in general than specific research subjects? Why is blogging important for the field of Medieval Studies in particular?
***** In the American sense of biscuit
There are 31 comments on this entry. (Reply.)
 
posted by [identity profile] angevin2.livejournal.com at 02:40am on 08/05/2006
Because no study of Richard II is complete without a new suggestion for the meaning of the Diptych.

Damn! Well, I'm only writing about later representations of him. I think this lets me off the hook. ;)

Given-Wilson is hilarious, and argued, among other things, that the Wilton Diptych* is a paean to virginity - everyone depicted in it is a virgin.

Everyone? Wasn't it painted, in all likelihood, in the late 1390s, and wouldn't that complicate that statement since by the late '90s Richard himself was already a widower? Or do you mean "everyone else"? (Or was Given-Wilson redating the diptych or making odd suggestions about Richard's sex life? ;) )
owlfish: (Default)
posted by [personal profile] owlfish at 02:51am on 08/05/2006
Surely Shakespeare wrote something which would illuminate previously unrealized aspects of the Wilton Diptych!

Given-Wilson was arguing that Richard wasn't a manly man; he was iconically virginal, whether or not literally. He had no children and his second bride was only 7 or 8 when they married. I can't swear that's exactly how the argument went, but it was along those lines. His argument certainly had nothing to do with the Diptych's dating.
 
posted by [identity profile] angevin2.livejournal.com at 02:59am on 08/05/2006
Ah, okay, that makes sense, then, and now I have a weird inclination to juxtapose it with Maidstone's Concordia which is just the opposite -- it's sort of a weird civic Song of Songs so Richard gets presented as all symbolically virile and stuff (there's a line in it to the effect of "may your royal rod guide subjects at its will"). Hrm.

Surely Shakespeare wrote something which would illuminate previously unrealized aspects of the Wilton Diptych!

Eh. Shakespeare's just got "God for his Richard hath in heavenly pay a glorious angel." There's actually a lot of cryptic stuff in Woodstock that -- oh, all right, no there isn't. ;)
 
posted by [identity profile] childeric.livejournal.com at 09:23am on 08/05/2006
Actually, to be fair, Chris G-W was actually basing that part of his argument on a paper of [livejournal.com profile] everild's (who was sitting next to me and practically died when he started banging on about it in front of that gigantic audience). Not sure where the article is - I'm no expert on all this later medieval nonsense :) - but have a look on the RHistS online bibliography under Katherine Lewis for 2003 or thereabouts and it'll probably show up.
 
posted by [identity profile] angevin2.livejournal.com at 07:49pm on 08/05/2006
Oh, thanks! I shall have to look that up, for sure. :)
owlfish: (Default)
posted by [personal profile] owlfish at 05:05am on 09/05/2006
Thank you for context. Was [livejournal.com profile] everild given credit in the talk?
 
posted by [identity profile] childeric.livejournal.com at 07:30am on 09/05/2006
Oh yes, very definitely so. CG-W said something along the lines that there had been two articles written in the past few years which had influenced ideas on perceptions of RII's masculinity; it was one of those which was Katherine's.
 
posted by [identity profile] morganlf.livejournal.com at 03:52am on 08/05/2006
hehe. I lurve the UCLA crowd, I do. I'm so very happy there!

PS--It was so very nice to see you again.
owlfish: (Default)
posted by [personal profile] owlfish at 04:12am on 08/05/2006
They're friendly, really tall, and well-dressed!

It was lovely to see you again too!
 
posted by [identity profile] a-d-medievalist.livejournal.com at 06:07am on 08/05/2006
I thought the blogger panel went rather well! Congrats! Wish we'd been able to spend more time together, though :-(
owlfish: (Default)
posted by [personal profile] owlfish at 05:06am on 09/05/2006
Thank you!

I wish we'd been able to spend more time together too. We never really had a proper conversation, even if we spent time in each other's general company with astrolabes and panel. I did look for you at wine hour after, but wine hour is an enormous and complicated thing.
 
posted by [identity profile] a-d-medievalist.livejournal.com at 05:51am on 09/05/2006
Yeah ... I was in the courtyard outside, because the crowds at the mead tasting were scary. I was with [livejournal.com profile] chilperic and The Cranky One, and Al Literative, though ...
 
posted by [identity profile] whatifoundthere.livejournal.com at 08:10am on 08/05/2006
We made it through all the most important questions I wanted to deal with

So what were all the answers? :)
 
posted by [identity profile] cataptromancer.livejournal.com at 02:46pm on 08/05/2006
= blogs are good, I'm guessing
owlfish: (Default)
posted by [personal profile] owlfish at 05:09am on 09/05/2006
 
posted by [identity profile] whatifoundthere.livejournal.com at 05:24am on 09/05/2006
Huh. Sounds very sunny. Were there no criticisms or concerns at all? I love blogging, of course, and spend a lot of time doing it, but that doesn't mean it's a flawless system.

I'm reminded of the time, a decade or so ago, when educators confidently declared that online learning was going to solve all the world's problems. Just get the students into a chat room or a web board and the course'll damn well teach itself! We don't need to pay to heat the room or photocopy any papers! We can show pictures! The MTV generation thinks like this so they will automatically love it!

We know better now (and some of us, I add bitterly, knew better even then). I understand the honeymoon thing but I think it's a good idea to get past it. If there were concerns about blog culture expressed at the panel (drama, TMI, 'friend' language, stalking, boundary/authority issues, and so on), I'd love to hear more about them. If not, then maybe I oughtta present my opinion next year and be all curmudgeonly and shit. :)
owlfish: (Default)
posted by [personal profile] owlfish at 05:11am on 10/05/2006
There was extensive discussion of security issues. Many weblog hosts are happy to roll over and tell all about their customers if they are convinced you work for an ISP. One advantage of LJ is locking/privacy. Weblogs are particularly good tools for specific things - I spun the question towards what are they specifically good for; obviously there are many other fine tools out there, and few of them are interchangable for most needs. Anonymity - or lack there of - can be a problem; there are real advantages to not giving one's identity away with a blog - empowers more specific discussions. There was a passing discussion - with a few examples - of stalking problems. Didn't get into boundary/authority issues, only passing mention of "friend" language, but then that's particularly bad on LJ and the panel didn't really get into comparative weblog hosts in great detail.

So that's some of the concerns that came up. It was only an hour and a half, and I was trying to keep it focused on medieval studies in particular, but there's certainly room to discussion other issues, as you mention. We're considering panel options for next year.
owlfish: (Default)
posted by [personal profile] owlfish at 05:12am on 10/05/2006
Which is to say, if you have concrete ideas for format other than a pedagogy one, do tell!
ext_6283: Brush the wandering hedgehog by the fire (Hedgehog goes aaargh)
posted by [identity profile] oursin.livejournal.com at 12:08pm on 08/05/2006
It's a session of all fake papers, delivered with straight faces and - when successful - designed to be really funny.

I only wish that this provided an explanation for a really bizarro paper I heard towards the end of a Victorian Studies conference - I don't think the fact that it came after several fairly intense ways was the reason that it didn't make sense to me, I think that was because, well, it didn't make sense. Except in some alternative time-travelling universe.
 
posted by [identity profile] dark-age-gal.livejournal.com at 03:00pm on 08/05/2006
I can't tell you how much I enjoyed our chat at the dance. That was much-needed! It was great to see you.
owlfish: (Default)
posted by [personal profile] owlfish at 05:09am on 09/05/2006
I needed it too! I can't remember - will you be around to be seeable in early June in T.O.?
 
posted by [identity profile] dark-age-gal.livejournal.com at 02:30pm on 09/05/2006
Indeed I will be!
 
posted by [identity profile] marzapane.livejournal.com at 03:17pm on 08/05/2006
Apropos of your call for food technology people, do you still have the contact info I gave you for the girl I know from Smith with a degree in food science, and a focus on medieval Jewish Italian food? I can dig it up again if you're interested.
owlfish: (Default)
posted by [personal profile] owlfish at 05:07am on 09/05/2006
Yes I do have it, and had completely forgotten. Thanks for the reminder!
 
posted by [identity profile] intertext.livejournal.com at 05:56pm on 08/05/2006
Speaking of fake papers and critical theory: are you familiar with this?
The Postmodern Generator is English's answer, and very funny if you have read or heard FAR too many papers that are not unlike what you see here.
owlfish: (Default)
posted by [personal profile] owlfish at 05:10am on 09/05/2006
I hadn't seen it! Thanks for the link.
ext_27060: Sumer is icomen in; llude sing cucu! (Default)
posted by [identity profile] rymenhild.livejournal.com at 07:37am on 09/05/2006
I thought the last paper at Pseudo Society skewered what it came to skewer quite accurately. That said, I didn't think it was actually funny. I probably would have appreciated it more if the panelist was mocking high theory as an insider rather than as an outsider.

Lovely meeting you, by the way! (At the blogging panel, and then later at the dance. At both places I was accompanied by my friend [livejournal.com profile] libraryhero.)
owlfish: (Default)
posted by [personal profile] owlfish at 05:17am on 10/05/2006
I'm glad you know you'd met me, since I didn't know I'd met you! I don't know library hero either, by alias. You weren't by any chance sitting with [livejournal.com profile] naomichana at the panel were you? That would helpfully narrow you down to one of two people, and people I know I met. And were at the dance.
ext_27060: Sumer is icomen in; llude sing cucu! (Default)
posted by [identity profile] rymenhild.livejournal.com at 07:21am on 10/05/2006
Yes, we were sitting with [livejournal.com profile] naomichana in the front stage left corner of the room.
 
posted by [identity profile] history-geek.livejournal.com at 01:36am on 10/05/2006
I had a great time meeting up with you at the Puesdo Society. Next year must send scouts for food and drink! *G*
owlfish: (Default)
posted by [personal profile] owlfish at 05:18am on 10/05/2006
You were good company! Yes, arrive early and co-ordinate with others is really the way to do it. Or at least arrive early and take turns hurrying out for food.

October

SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
1
 
2
 
3
 
4
 
5
 
6
 
7
 
8
 
9
 
10 11
 
12
 
13
 
14
 
15
 
16
 
17
 
18
 
19
 
20
 
21
 
22
 
23
 
24
 
25
 
26
 
27
 
28
 
29
 
30
 
31