Rarin’ to get to Atlanta!
UPDATE 4/16/2014: The video of our panel is now online. Thanks to Nic Champagne (@videobynic) who was the videographer & who alerted me to the video.
Sometime last winter, Rosemarie Zagarri invited me to appear on a panel at the 2014 annual conference of the Organization of American Historians on the subject “Is Blogging Scholarship?” (Tenured Radical has written about our session, pointing out that it’s unfortunately scheduled for Sunday morning in the last sesssion the whole conference!) I’m really looking forward to meeting (finally!) my fellow panelists Jeffrey Pasley of the University of Missouri and Common-Place; John Fea of The Way of Improvement Leads Home, Michael O’Malley of The Aporetic, and Ben Alpers of USIH Blog.
I’ll give you the big reveal now: my answer to the question is for the most part Continue reading
2014-15 is going to be a pretty sweet year for me, as I’m going to be a long-term fellow at the Huntington next academic year! Yes, from August 2014 until June 2015, I will hold the Dana and David Dornsife Fellowship there. (I’ve known for over two months now and have been waiting for the Huntington to update their website, but I just can’t wait any longer to share the good news!) That’s right, friends: it’s swimming pools & movie stars for Historiann next year, at least on the weekends.
Here’s what the entire famille Historiann will look like on our way west this summer:
Lest you think my success this year was a coup de foudre, I’ll have you know that I have applied unsuccessfully for a long-term fellowship at the Huntington four times in the previous five years! Continue reading
How’s that for irony? That’s what the Scholarly Advisory Council was told by the National Women’s History Museum’s President and CEO Joan Wages last month, according to former SAC member Sonya Michel. (You can see the NMWH’s announcement of the SAC’s walking papers here.) Michel, for those of you who don’t know her or her work, is an eminent scholar of gender, povery, and social welfare. She writes:
Last month’s dismissal of the scholars followed yet another example of a museum offering that embarrassed those of us who were trying to ensure that the institution was adhering to the highest standards in our field. In mid-March, the museum announced that it had launched a new online exhibit, “Pathways to Equality: The U.S. Women’s Rights Movement Emerges,” in conjunction with the Google Cultural Institute. Never informed that the exhibit was in the works, much less given an opportunity to vet it, we were appalled to discover that it was riddled with historical errors and inaccuracies. To pick just one example: Harriet Beecher Stowe was described as having been “born into a family of abolitionists” when, from the time of her birth through her young adulthood in the 1830s, her family actively opposed the abolitionist movement. “Pathways to Equality,” noted Kathryn Kish Sklar, the nineteenth-century specialist who pointed out the error, “could have been written by a middle-school student.”
Actually, if I were Sklar, I would have said that “a middle-school student who had consulted my prizewinning biography of Catherine Beecher could have put together a stronger online presentation.” Continue reading
Steven Hayward, The University of Colorado-Boulder’s first Visiting Scholar of Conservative Thought and Policy, has worked to ingratiate himself with his students and faculty colleagues. By “ingratiate,” I mean he wrote an assy blog post for the
noted conservative policy journal non peer-reviewed blog Powerline called “Off on a Gender Bender,” in which he complained about and ridiculed some diversity training in which professors were instructed to ask students which pronouns they prefer:
I’m more curious to learn whether there have been many students—or any students, ever—who have demanded to be addressed in class by a different gender pronoun, or called by a different gender name . . . , let alone turn up in class in wardrobe by Corporal Klinger. My guess is the actual number of such students approaches zero.
So why is this gender-bending diversity mandate so prominent at universities these days? The most likely explanation is that it (sic) is simply yielding to the demands of the folks who dislike any constraint of human nature in what goes by the LGBTQRSTUW (or whatever letters have been added lately) “community.” I place “community” in quotation marks here because the very idea of community requires a certain commonality based ultimately in nature, while the premise behind gender-bending is resolutely to deny any such nature, including especially human nature.
Did Professor Hayward ever participate in a study abroad program, or take an anthropology class? Has he never been introduced to the concept of observing politely the customs of the locals before insulting and belittling them? Continue reading
Claire Potter (aka Tenured Radical) has an interesting post on her book blog about the assumptions that audiences make about the politics of historians based on their subject matter choices. She writes:
It isn’t uncommon that, when hearing about the research I have done on the history of anti-pornography feminism, audiences assume that I must be an anti-pornography feminist too.But do you know that? Do you even have the right to ask? Should I tell you?
My hope for this book is that you will be so compelled by my scholarship that you will never know my private views on this question.
I found the assumption really interesting, in that the vast, vast, vast majority of feminist intellectuals I know and have worked with are far from anti-porn feminists. Maybe my experiences are idiosyncratic, but in my experience academic feminists–much as most of us are disgusted by mainstream pornography–tend also to be First Amendment absolutists.
Potter continues with a meditation about identity politics and historical subject matter that is really worth the read:
Making assumptions about intellectuals based on superficial knowledge of their research interests is fairly common, but honestly? I think it happens to women, queers and people of color more often. I have a friend and colleague who is African-American, and writing a history of African-American conservative thought. That colleague is frequently assumed to be a conservative, much as I am often presumed, on the basis of nothing, to be an anti-pornography feminist. Continue reading
Homo Signorum, ca. 1486, from Guild Book of Barber Surgeons
From The Husband-Man’s Guide (Boston, 1712):
In this month sow Hemp & Flax, pole hops, set and sow all kind of tender herbs and seeds. Restore the liberty of the laborious Bee, by opening her hive. Let Tanners now begin to prepare to get Bark, and the good Housewives mind their gardens, and begin to think of their Daries. Now purge & bleed, you that need; for the use of Physick is yet very seasonable, the Pores of the body being open; therefore this and the last Month is th’ best time to remove and prevent Causes of sickness, and for speedy remedy in any extremity. Let blood these two Months the Moon being in Cancer, Acquary or Taurus, but held to be extream perilous for the Moon to be in that sign which ruleth the Member where the Vein is opened. So also it is held best to take Purges when the Moon is in Cancer, Scorpio or Pisces. But an Oyntment or Plaster is best apply’d when the Moon is in the same Sign that rules the Member to which it is applicable.
As it says after one of its recommended decoctions for common human complaints: Continue reading