Hi all:

What follows is a summary of last week’s group meeting. Many thanks to those who came and participated, and to those who contributed by writing in advance of the meeting. Of course please feel free to emend or elaborate on anything that follows, and/or simply to offer anything new. The summary per se is followed by a list of things to be done, including an indication of how they might be accomplished.

First, course offerings.
This is a list of the (in some cases tentative) titles of courses that are in the works for AY2015-16. Please note that this is likely not exhaustive; it merely reflects the information I received ahead of the meeting.
– Ammiel Alcalay, course title TBA

– Kandice Chuh, Settler Colonialism, Indigeneity, and Race as Paradigms of Decolonization

– Duncan Faherty, Incarceration, Enslavement, and Captivity in the Long 18th Century Circum-Atlantic World

– David Reynolds, The American Renaissance

– Joan Richardson, American Aesthetics: “…the feeling of if”

– Michelle Wallace, Toni Morrison: The Novels

Second, curricular matters.
Our discussion of the overall American Literature curriculum was wide-ranging (more on that below), and included the identification of five areas in which course offerings are welcome/necessary. These are:
-Native American literary studies;
-U.S. Latino/a and Chicano/a literary studies;
-speculative fiction studies;
-“alternative” literature studies (e.g., graphic novels); and,
– ecocritical approaches to cultural study.

There was also express interest in hemispheric studies, comparative racialization courses and performance studies, as well as in team-taught courses that might allow for traditionally cast fields (by historical focus or geography, for example) to encounter/engage theoretical genealogies (like queer theory and ecocriticism, for example).

We made note of the fact that the program is issuing a call for a course offering in U.S. Latino/a or Chicano/a studies. We also noted that it has been possible and necessary for students to take courses in consortium schools in order to supplement the English program’s offerings, and that graphic writing courses had been offered in recent years past.

Third, constitution of the American literature group.
We discussed the (in)coherence of this group given the wide-ranging areas of study and modes of critical inquiry represented both by the faculty associated with American literature and curricular offerings. Part of our conversation was attending to the governance and organizational structure of the program, which includes the tethering of area groups to executive committee representation and to the numbers of courses in a given area offered, as well as the impact of the course units dedicated to central line faculty, many of whom are Americanists, broadly construed.

I noted as well that it might be helpful to explore the possibility of delinking representation and course offerings from area groups in the administration of the program as a possible way of addressing this complex of issues. This would be a conversation that would need to unfold in the standing committees (executive, curriculum, faculty membership) of the program, as well as in the program generally.

In addressing the question of whether it made sense to proliferate groups rather than have one American Literature group, we discussed possible ways of formulating such multiplicity, including based on historical periodization, genealogy (i.e., U.S. ethnic studies), or orientation (i.e., the distinction between American Literature and U.S. cultural studies, e.g.)….

…which led to…

Finally and fourth, programming.
Rather than trying to settle this question, this meeting generated the suggestion to create an occasion – possibly a Friday Forum session – designed to allow for greater consideration of these matters. Such a session might explore matters like the distinction between American Literature and U.S. cultural studies; the relationship of American Literature to U.S. ethnic literary and cultural studies; the saliency of periodization; the implied and historic geographies of American Literature; and, the institutional history of American Literature as a field of English.

I also noted that in February and March (13 Feb and 20 Mar to be precise), the English program will be offering panels focused on U.S. Latino/a and Chicano/a cultural studies, which are being organized through the program’s diversity committee.

There was also strong interest in professionalization activities that might be orientated toward those engaging in U.S. cultural studies and literary studies, again, broadly construed. Such activities include workshops related to publication and proposal crafting (for conferences and fellowships), specifically designed for literary studies and cultural studies practitioners.
And, there was an interest in organizing a reading group, most immediately of Stuart Hall’s Policing the Crisis. This particular interest emerges from the exigencies of the current historical conjuncture, and anticipates the biggish Stuart Hall event that is in the works for March 2015.

Things to do:
So, the uptake of all this is that there are both short term and longer term tasks to undertake under the aegis of this group.

1. The Stuart Hall reading group. We tentatively agreed to hold this in the week just prior to the beginning of the spring semester. I’ll make some suggestions as to what we should read out of Hall’s volume, and find a room to accommodate us.

2. The potential Friday Forum/on the coherency of American Literature session. In the spring, when requests for FF sessions circulate, we can put one in toward these ends. And, if this session can’t be accommodated by the FF schedule, we’ll find an alternative time/space to hold this event. We can collectively conjure the list of potential panelists as the time to put in an FF request draws nearer.

3. Professionalization activities. The first of these will be held in late spring 2015 and geared toward preparing students in Am Lit and U.S. cultural and ethnic studies for the fall 2015 job search season. In the fall, we’ll hold sessions on cvs, crafting abstracts for conferences, and drafting fellowship applications. While these activities may overlap with program professionalization efforts, we noted that having opportunities for Americanists specifically would only benefit/supplement whatever else the program might offer.

I think that’s about it. Again, please don’t hesitate to add to or emend anything reported here.
Future missives regarding how all this is shaping up will follow. Happy end of term wishes to every in the meantime!

Kandice

Hi all:

What follows is a summary of last week’s group meeting. Many thanks to those who came and participated, and to those who contributed by writing in advance of the meeting. Of course please feel free to emend or elaborate on anything that follows, and/or simply to offer anything new. The summary per se is followed by a list of things to be done, including an indication of how they might be accomplished.

First, course offerings.
This is a list of the (in some cases tentative) titles of courses that are in the works for AY2015-16. Please note that this is likely not exhaustive; it merely reflects the information I received ahead of the meeting.
– Ammiel Alcalay, course title TBA

– Kandice Chuh, Settler Colonialism, Indigeneity, and Race as Paradigms of Decolonization

– Duncan Faherty, Incarceration, Enslavement, and Captivity in the Long 18th Century Circum-Atlantic World

– David Reynolds, The American Renaissance

– Joan Richardson, American Aesthetics: “…the feeling of if”

– Michelle Wallace, Toni Morrison: The Novels

Second, curricular matters.
Our discussion of the overall American Literature curriculum was wide-ranging (more on that below), and included the identification of five areas in which course offerings are welcome/necessary. These are:
-Native American literary studies;
-U.S. Latino/a and Chicano/a literary studies;
-speculative fiction studies;
-“alternative” literature studies (e.g., graphic novels); and,
– ecocritical approaches to cultural study.

There was also express interest in hemispheric studies, comparative racialization courses and performance studies, as well as in team-taught courses that might allow for traditionally cast fields (by historical focus or geography, for example) to encounter/engage theoretical genealogies (like queer theory and ecocriticism, for example).

We made note of the fact that the program is issuing a call for a course offering in U.S. Latino/a or Chicano/a studies. We also noted that it has been possible and necessary for students to take courses in consortium schools in order to supplement the English program’s offerings, and that graphic writing courses had been offered in recent years past.

Third, constitution of the American literature group.
We discussed the (in)coherence of this group given the wide-ranging areas of study and modes of critical inquiry represented both by the faculty associated with American literature and curricular offerings. Part of our conversation was attending to the governance and organizational structure of the program, which includes the tethering of area groups to executive committee representation and to the numbers of courses in a given area offered, as well as the impact of the course units dedicated to central line faculty, many of whom are Americanists, broadly construed.

I noted as well that it might be helpful to explore the possibility of delinking representation and course offerings from area groups in the administration of the program as a possible way of addressing this complex of issues. This would be a conversation that would need to unfold in the standing committees (executive, curriculum, faculty membership) of the program, as well as in the program generally.

In addressing the question of whether it made sense to proliferate groups rather than have one American Literature group, we discussed possible ways of formulating such multiplicity, including based on historical periodization, genealogy (i.e., U.S. ethnic studies), or orientation (i.e., the distinction between American Literature and U.S. cultural studies, e.g.)….

…which led to…

Finally and fourth, programming.
Rather than trying to settle this question, this meeting generated the suggestion to create an occasion – possibly a Friday Forum session – designed to allow for greater consideration of these matters. Such a session might explore matters like the distinction between American Literature and U.S. cultural studies; the relationship of American Literature to U.S. ethnic literary and cultural studies; the saliency of periodization; the implied and historic geographies of American Literature; and, the institutional history of American Literature as a field of English.

I also noted that in February and March (13 Feb and 20 Mar to be precise), the English program will be offering panels focused on U.S. Latino/a and Chicano/a cultural studies, which are being organized through the program’s diversity committee.

There was also strong interest in professionalization activities that might be orientated toward those engaging in U.S. cultural studies and literary studies, again, broadly construed. Such activities include workshops related to publication and proposal crafting (for conferences and fellowships), specifically designed for literary studies and cultural studies practitioners.
And, there was an interest in organizing a reading group, most immediately of Stuart Hall’s Policing the Crisis. This particular interest emerges from the exigencies of the current historical conjuncture, and anticipates the biggish Stuart Hall event that is in the works for March 2015.

Things to do:
So, the uptake of all this is that there are both short term and longer term tasks to undertake under the aegis of this group.

1. The Stuart Hall reading group. We tentatively agreed to hold this in the week just prior to the beginning of the spring semester. I’ll make some suggestions as to what we should read out of Hall’s volume, and find a room to accommodate us.

2. The potential Friday Forum/on the coherency of American Literature session. In the spring, when requests for FF sessions circulate, we can put one in toward these ends. And, if this session can’t be accommodated by the FF schedule, we’ll find an alternative time/space to hold this event. We can collectively conjure the list of potential panelists as the time to put in an FF request draws nearer.

3. Professionalization activities. The first of these will be held in late spring 2015 and geared toward preparing students in Am Lit and U.S. cultural and ethnic studies for the fall 2015 job search season. In the fall, we’ll hold sessions on cvs, crafting abstracts for conferences, and drafting fellowship applications. While these activities may overlap with program professionalization efforts, we noted that having opportunities for Americanists specifically would only benefit/supplement whatever else the program might offer.

I think that’s about it. Again, please don’t hesitate to add to or emend anything reported here.
Future missives regarding how all this is shaping up will follow. Happy end of term wishes to every in the meantime!

Kandice