Last call! This panel aims to use the framework of oceanic studies to interrogate Victorian sea fiction. We welcome work on nineteenth-century writers across the Anglophone world, though could be open to works in other languages. We are particularly looking for works that do not fall into traditional nationalist canons of literature or works that epitomize transnational networks of culture, empire, and economics.
At the 2nd International Laurence Sterne Foundation Conference (26-28 October, Bydgoszcz, Poland) Dr Katarzyna Bazarnik will be convening the panel "Sterne, liberature, and the contemporary novel", addressing the multifaceted imprint of Sterne on the contemporary novelistic discourse.
To read more on the conference, please go to www.sterne2017.pl
The 49th NeMLA Annual Convention
April 12-15, 2018 - Pittsburgh, PA
As capital flows freely across national borders, the sovereign state demarcates strict boundaries for people. Capitalism forges global connections with international solidarity organized around wealth. Yet as Foucault has argued, intranational spaces are increasingly heavily policed in the name of homeland security, giving rise to the security state and technologies of surveillance.
At the 2nd International Laurence Sterne Foundation Conference (26-28 October 2017, in Bydgoszcz, Poland) Prof. Peter de Voogd will be convening the panel "Sterne and (Post)Modernism revisited".
The panel will cover various aspects of Sternean echoes in later literature, revisiting some of the issues addressed in the collection "Laurence Sterne in Modernism and Postmodernism" (ed. Peter de Voogd, David Pierce; Rodopi, 1996).
Works of literature can be viewed from many angles or schools of critical thought and yield "meaning" dependent on through what school you choose to critique a text. Marjorie Garber closes her book The Use and Abuse of Literature stating
Literary interpretation, like literature, does not seek answers or closure. A multiplicity of persuasive and well-argued "meanings" does not mean the death or loss of meaning, but rather the living presence of the literary work in culture, society, and the individual creative imagination. To say that closure is impossible is to acknowledge the richness and fecundity of both the reading and the writing process.
Theoretical Studies in Literature and Art (ISSN 0257-0254), launched in 1980 and published bimonthly, a most highly recognized peer-reviewed journal in China, publishes original papers in Chinese or English in arts and humanities, especially literary studies. We welcome MLA-style papers of 6000-12000 words in the fields of literary theory, critical theory, aesthetics, philosophy of art, cultural studies, etc.
The 49th NeMLA Annual ConventionApril 12-15, 2018 Pittsburgh, PA
This panel seeks to investigate particular narrative strategies of describing the non-human experience in literature, drama, philosophy, and art throughout the ages (not simply the 21st century). Papers for this panel are invited to reflect the following questions: how are ideas of the non-human transmitted in literature, art, and other media and how can we assess them? What trends, novel methods, gaps, or fallbacks are present as humans attempt to understand the other? Further, how do narrative strategies across media or time periods compare or contrast?
Possible approaches to investigating narrative strategies may include but are non limited to:
Papers addressing the difficulties of students for whom academia is foreign, considered in terms of the student’s alienation, psychological unpreparedness, underdeveloped perspective, etc. How can such students be incorporated into academia, and thereby into work (and life broadly) made accessible by education? Alternatively, should we seek such incorporation, or instead reimagine and change academia, and how? Institutions have implemented a variety of assimilation and retention strategies, some with better records than others. Some programs engage students individually, whereas others emphasize building communities; some strategies focus on key first-year courses, such as introductory writing.
This panel reflects on the place of confusion in British and American modernism. Confusion has not been traditionally considered a proper scholarly response to textual analysis; critics are supposed to interpret a text rather than allow themselves to experience its uncertainties. What happens when we explore the confusion we feel when reading not as something to be worked through, but as something to be worked with? Building on affect theorists’ work on how our feelings can influence the way we read, such as Eve Sedgwick’s reparative reading and Rita Felski’s reflective and post-critical reading, how can considering confusion change both our experience of reading and our critical practices?