Skip to content

The NACBS Blog

December
6
2017

CFP: Mid-Atlantic Conference on British Studies (MACBS) Annual Meeting

Posted by rdaily under conference | Tags: cfp, macbs | 0 Comments

MID-ATLANTIC CONFERENCE ON BRITISH STUDIES ANNUAL MEETING
UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND
SATURDAY and SUNDAY, APRIL 7-8, 2018

The MACBS -- the mid-Atlantic affiliate of the NACBS, the main organization for British Studies in Canada and the United States – is soliciting proposals for papers and panels on all areas of British Studies for our annual conference. We welcome participation from scholars of Britain, the British Atlantic World, and the British Empire broadly defined, and we are open to proposals ranging from the ancient to the contemporary and from scholars of history, anthropology, literature, art, politics, economics and related fields. Senior faculty, junior faculty, and graduate students are all encouraged to participate.

Proposals for both individual papers and full panels are welcome. Paper proposals should include a brief (no more than 250 words) abstract of the paper and a curriculum vita. Full panel proposals should also include a one-paragraph description of the panel’s overall aim and indicate which panel member will serve as the organizer and primary contact.

All submissions must be received by 3 January 2018. 

Send proposals via email to:

Prof. Nicholas Popper, Program Co-Chair
Dept. of History
College of William & Mary
[email protected]
 
Prof. Katie Hindmarch-Watson, Program Co-Chair
Dept. of History
Johns Hopkins University
[email protected]
 

For additional information, please see the MACBS website:
http://www.lehman.edu/academics/arts-humanities/history/macbs/

0 Comments Read full post »

December
1
2017

My NACBS: Our new series dedicated to building community and collaborations.

Posted by rdaily under MyNACBS | Tags: Interview | 0 Comments

This is the first post in our new series designed to introduce and connect NACBS members. Taking our lead from the American Historical Association’s member spotlight posts, we hope to deepen our sense of community through short posts that delve into who we are and what we value. For more information on this new series, contact Blog editor Stephen Jackson at [email protected].

Name and title: Kathrin Levitan, Associate Professor of History at the College of William and Mary


What are your fields of interest?

I work on nineteenth-century Britain and the British Empire. I usually call myself a social and cultural historian but my work really includes political and intellectual history as well. The research projects I have done, while covering very different topics, have all addressed nineteenth-century debates about empire, gender, class, and political power.

What are you currently working on?

I am currently working on a project on letter-writing and the Post Office in nineteenth-century Britain and the British Empire. I am interested in letter-writing as a social practice during the era of industrialization, when more people had access to letters than ever before. Nineteenth-century discussions about postal infrastructure and letters speak to all kinds of important issues, including gender, migration, class, nation-building and empire-building, and literary genre.

Do you have a favorite archive, digital or physical? What about it draws you in? 

I love working at the National Archives in Kew. This was the first archive that I really worked at, and although I have worked at many others since then it still draws me back. I love how open and accessible it is, how easy it is to use, and how it draws all kinds of people from school children to academics to people researching their own families.

Have you ever experienced a “break-through” moment while researching? What was it like?

I had an interesting experience recently while working on my letter-writing project.  While working in the Post Office archive in London, I began to look at Post Office appointment books, which for centuries listed the names and salaries of postal officials across the country. I realized that women who ran rural, colonial, and sometimes major urban post offices in Britain were in some cases making very high salaries and supervising large numbers of employees, at a time when almost no other government jobs were available to women. This made me realize that postmistresses and their circumstances were worth studying in their own right. What made this somewhat of a “break-through” moment for me was the fact that it drew me away from my initial purpose and into a side project of sorts, which was in fact very different from the primary project from which it arose. My interest in postmistresses has compelled me to look at a number of archival sources that are more obscure and specific than the more public sources I had been looking at about postal reform and theories of letter-writing. They have allowed me to reconstruct historical details about particular women who have not been part of the historical narrative about the Post Office. 

What attracted you to this work? Why British studies?

I have always been interested in European history, and my teaching and research interests remain transnational now. I may have been attracted specifically to studying Britain partly through reading nineteenth-century British novels. In college I double-majored in English and History and I continue to do interdisciplinary work. 

Have your academic interests transformed over time?

In some ways my interests have changed and in other ways they have remained remarkably consistent.  When I finished my book about the British census and began doing research on letter-writing and the Post Office I was surprised to find how much overlap the topics had. While I thought that I was making a shift to thinking much more about everyday life through the social practice of letter-writing, I found that in fact both the census and postal reform were government projects that were billed as democratizers and national unifiers, that were supported by Whigs and that provoked suspicion among Tories, and that forced me to investigate the connection between government documents, newspapers, and more personal and sometimes literary sources.

Does your project have any particular relevance to the contemporary?

I am currently working on a project about a communication revolution of sorts – the moment when letter-writing became accessible to large numbers of people, and in some cases began to take over large segments of people’s everyday lives. This clearly has relevance to current discussions about communication. Like many people in our own time, nineteenth-century observers were interested in the question of whether faster, cheaper, and more regular communication fundamentally changed people’s relationships and ways of thinking about their own geographic mobility.

How do you engage students in British studies?

 I try to engage students by exposing them to a wide variety of texts as well as musical and artistic productions from the past. In some cases, students may already be familiar with a particular text or other source, but they may not have read it or interpreted it through the lens of British history. As one example, I sometimes show a clip from the movie Mary Poppins that allows us to discuss gender norms and Empire in the Edwardian period. While most students are already familiar with the film, they are often surprised to see that it has relevance to the history that we are studying in class.

Do you have a favorite text to teach?

I have so many favorite texts to teach! A few of my favorites in British Studies include Samuel Taylor Coleridge’s France, An Ode, Mary Prince’s A History of Mary Prince, Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol, a government investigative document called “Women Miners in the English Coal Pits,” Joseph Conrad’s “An Outpost of Progress,” and Andrea Levy’s novel Small Island.

Do you have a book, museum, television series or film you would recommend to our readers?

Two televisions series that are relevant to either my teaching or my research are Foyle’s War (about Britain during World War II, and particularly the social effects of war) and Lark Rise to Candleford (about a country post office and its postmistress in the late nineteenth century). A film that I sometimes teach and that I would recommend in general is The Wind that Shakes the Barley, about the war for Irish independence. Regarding museums and books, there are too many good ones to list!

 

0 Comments Read full post »

 

Theme: “Populations: counting, classifying, moving and managing groups of people”

Deadline Extension: March 5, 2018.

Materials: CV and 1-page abstract

This workshop will explore the topic of “populations” in the early modern period. How, by whom, and to what ends were groups of people defined or treated as populations? What were the intellectual and practical consequences of such classifications? What historical or historiographical legacies have they had? How do historians’ definitions of “population” replicate or resist early modern categories and practices? How do current social-scientific, political, or legal understandings of population help or hinder historical analysis? Papers may address these questions from perspectives including but not limited to migration and colonization; slavery, race and ethnicity; reproduction; medicine and health; religious and national difference; political economy and governance; political arithmetic and information.

The session will include 6-8 pre-circulated papers of 15-25 pages each. Participants will be chosen with a view to the complementarity of their research topics and strong preference will be given to graduate students and early career scholars. Participants must be prepared to submit their papers by September 30, 2018. Each participant will be required to read all papers for the session, and to share written comments on two of the papers, prior to the conference. The session itself will include brief presentations and discussions of each paper, followed by a more extensive conversation between participants and the audience around common questions and themes.

Those interested must submit a CV and a one-page abstract to Rachel Weil ([email protected]) and Ted McCormick ([email protected]) by March 5, 2018.

Note: Those not accepted for the early modern workshop may still submit proposals for NACBS poster sessions, or paper or panel proposals for regular NACBS sessions, by the general deadline of March 30, 2018. Some financial assistance will be available for graduate students (up to US$500) and for a limited number of under/unemployed members within ten years of their terminal degree (US$300). Details of these travel grants will be posted to www.nacbs.org and emailed to members once the 2018 meeting program is prepared.

0 Comments Read full post »

November
30
2017

Call for Papers: NACBS Annual Meeting in Providence, Rhode Island October 25-28, 2018

Posted by StephenJackson under CFP, conference | Tags: cfp | 0 Comments

The NACBS and its affiliate, the Northeast Conference on British Studies, seek participation by scholars in all areas of British Studies for the 2018 meeting. We will meet in Providence, Rhode Island, from October 25-28, 2018. We solicit proposals for presentations on Britain, the British Empire, and the British world, including topics relating to component parts of Britain and on British influence (or vice versa) in Ireland, the Commonwealth, and former colonies in Asia, Africa, and the Caribbean (etc.) Our interests range from the medieval to the modern. We welcome participation by scholars from across the humanities and social sciences, from all parts of the globe (not just North America), and from all career stages and backgrounds. We reaffirm our commitment to British Studies broadly conceived, and welcome proposals that reflect the diversity of scholars and scholarship in the field.

We invite panel proposals that address selected themes, methodology, and pedagogy, as well as roundtable discussions of topical and thematic interest, including conversations among authors of recent books, reflections on landmark scholarship, and discussions about professional practice.  We are particularly interested in submissions that have a broad chronological focus and/or interdisciplinary breadth.  Standard panels typically include three presenters speaking for 20 minutes each, a commentator, and a chair, while roundtables typically include four presenters speaking for 15 minutes each and a chair. We are open to other formats, though; please feel free to consult with the program committee chair.

We hope to secure as broad a range of participation as possible and will thus consider individual paper proposals in addition to the standard full panel proposals. Our preference is for panels that include both emerging and established scholars; we welcome the participation of junior scholars and Ph.D. candidates beyond the qualifying stage. To foster intellectual interchange, we ask applicants to compose panels that feature participation from multiple institutions. In an effort to allow a broader range of participants, no participant will be permitted to take part in more than one session in a substantial role. (That is, someone presenting or commenting on one panel cannot also present or comment on another, though individuals presenting or commenting on one panel may serve as chairs for other panels, if need be.) Submissions are welcome from participants in last year’s conference, though if the number of strong submissions exceeds the number of available spaces, selection decisions may take into account recent participation.

As complete panels are more likely to be accepted, we recommend that interested participants issue calls on H-Albion or social media (e.g., @TheNACBS on Twitter or on the NACBS Facebook page) to arrange a panel. If a full panel cannot be arranged by the deadline, however, please do submit the individual proposal and the program committee will try to build submissions into full panels as appropriate.

In addition to the panels, we will be sponsoring a poster session.  The posters will be exhibited throughout the conference, and there will be a scheduled time when presenters will be with their posters to allow for further discussion. 

The submission website at http://nacbs.org/conference will open in early January; submissions will close as of 30 March 30 2018.

All submissions are electronic, and need to be completed in one sitting.   Before you start your submission, you should have the following information:

  1. Names, affiliations and email addresses for all panel participants.  PLEASE NOTE: We create the program from the submission, so be sure that names, institutional titles, and paper titles are provided as they should appear on the program.  
  2. A note whether data projection is necessary, desired, or unnecessary.
  3. A brief summary CV for each participant, indicating education, current affiliations, and major publications.   (750 words maximum per CV.)
  4. Title and Abstract for each paper or presentation.   Roundtables do not need titles for each presentation, but if you have them, that is fine.  If there is no title, there should still be an abstract – i.e. “X will speak about this subject through the lens of this period/approach/region etc.”
  5. POSTERS: Those proposing posters should enter organizer information and first presenter information only.

All communication will be through the panel organizer, who will be responsible for ensuring that members of the panel receive the information they need.

All program presenters must be current members of the NACBS by September 28, one month before the conference, or risk being removed from the program.

 

Some financial assistance will become available for graduate students (up to $500) and for a limited number of under/unemployed members within ten years of their terminal degree ($300). Details of these travel grants and how to apply will be posted to www.nacbs.org and emailed to members after the program for the 2018 meeting is prepared.

0 Comments Read full post »

America Meredith, 2012

The road to Indigenous London, strangely enough, began in Seattle. For my doctoral research, I completed a dissertation that would eventually become Native Seattle: Histories from the Crossing-Over Place (2007), a book that examined three kinds of Native history in the city: the experiences of the local Duwamish people, in whose traditional territory the city was built beginning in the 1850s; the histories of Native migration to the city from other places, starting in the later nineteenth century; and the uses of “Indian” imagery such as totem poles and the iconic Chief Seattle in the urban imaginary, something that has always been a part of the city’s history. Instead of treating Indigenous and urban histories as mutually exclusive – a typical way to narrate North American history – I argued that they have in fact been mutually constitutive.

During the same years that I was finishing Native Seattle, I was married to a Londoner. We travelled to the city on the Thames regularly, and each time, I found myself wishing I was not a historian of the nineteenth- and twentieth-century American West, but instead one with expertise in the kinds of history that would allow me to write about London. I was especially captivated by the idea of hidden histories within the urban landscape, from the works of Thomas de Quincey and Henry Mayhew through to P. L. Travers, Arthur Machen, Iain Sinclair, and China Miéville. I also became obsessed with lost rivers like the Effra and the Fleet, many of which still flow under the city. It was this sense of fugitive and occulted landscapes within a palimpsestic and deeply storied civic fabric that I found so compelling. And so, when my husband jokingly suggested I should write a book like Native Seattle about London, I at first scoffed, but quickly realized that this would be something potentially innovative. What would it look like to take the basic premise of Native Seattle – refracting a city’s history through Indigenous experience – and apply it to the centre of empire?

The result is Indigenous London. It is a five-hundred-years-and-then-some history of London framed through the experiences of Indigenous women, children, and men to traveled to the city, willingly or otherwise, from territories that became Canada, the US, New Zealand, and Australia, beginning in 1502 and continuing into the early twenty-first century. Built around what I call “domains of entanglement” – knowledge, disorder, reason, ritual, discipline, and memory – and including six poetic interludes built out of archival fragments, the book, parallel in many ways to Native Seattle, makes the claim that London’s urban history is bound up with the histories of Indigenous peoples throughout these four settler societies.

To get at this history, I not only had to become conversant in the histories of, for example, the Māori peoples of Aotearoa/New Zealand, but to work my way into the massive literature on the social and cultural history of London itself. The research not only took me to archives with strong Indigenous holdings – most notably the Newberry and Huntington libraries – but deep into the stacks of the British Library and the Institute for Historical Research.

For example, one of the stories in Indigenous London that readers tend to have strong responses to is that of Nutaaq, an Inuit baby who was put on display in a City tavern in 1577 but who died soon after. He was buried at St. Olave’s Church, Hart Street. To understand Nutaaq’s context, I not only had to survey the history of Inuit-English encounters in the early modern period; I also needed to create a “deep map” of St. Olave’s, a church whose most famous congregant was Samuel Pepys. (Indeed, the fragmentary archive related to Nutaaq, contrasted with Pepys’s encyclopedic, self-referential corpus, symbolizes for me the very nature of colonialism.) I also needed to include the story of Peter Morin, a Tahltan scholar and performance artist from Canada, whose “cultural graffiti” in London included a 2013 ceremony to honour the spirit of the lost boy. This interleaving of the urban and the Indigenous, of the past and the present, is emblematic of the work I was trying to do with Indigenous London.

Another interleaving of this sort can be found on the cover of the book. In 1762, three Cherokee diplomats traveled to London to cement peace after the close of the Anglo-Cherokee War. Like Indigenous travelers before and since, Utsidihi, Kunagadoga, and Atawayi were massive celebrities during their time in the city, with references to their stay appearing in London newspapers and even in the work of William Hogarth, and their political work resonated in Cherokee territory as well. Two hundred and fifty years later, in fact, the Cherokee Nations sent a delegation to Britain to walk in the footsteps of the three diplomats. Among this group was an artist named America Meredith, who commemorated the 2012 trip by creating a work that imagined the three original travelers walking across the iconic Abbey Road zebra crossing. Simultaneously iconically London and immediately recognizable as Indigenous, the image does work that parallels the story I was trying to tell, of the intersections between urban and Indigenous histories on a global and imperial scale, and of the power of Indigenous memory despite the traumas of settler colonialism.

There are so many other stories to share: not just of captives and diplomats, but of athletes and poets, medicine people and missionaries, and many others. And these are just the stories of London; there are other projects currently in the works on Indigenous histories in other imperial cities: Rome, Madrid, and beyond. To tell these kinds of urban Indigenous histories is to reframe not only the cities in question, but the place of Indigenous history in world history. Instead of relegating Indigenous peoples to the past as foils to global modernity, this work illustrates the ways in which Indigenous people and peoples were co-creators of that modernity. To do so, I hope, speaks back to empire in solidarity with today’s Indigenous communities and nations.

 Coll Thrush is professor and graduate chair at the history department of the University of British Columbia.

0 Comments Read full post »

October
27
2017

Final Program, NACBS Annual Conference

Posted by rdaily under conference | Tags: program | 0 Comments

The final program for the Annual North American Conference on British Studies, to be held in Denver, CO from November 3 through 5, can be downloaded here: NACBS Annual Conference Final Program - 2017

0 Comments Read full post »

September
19
2017

Final Program, Annual Midwest Conference on British Studies

Posted by rdaily under MWCBS | Tags: annual conference, program | 0 Comments

 

The final program for the 64th Annual Midwest conference on British studies, to be held in St. Louis from September 28 through October 1, can be downloaded here: MWCBS Final Program-2017.

0 Comments Read full post »

September
4
2017

CFP: British Literature and Sociology, 1838-1910

Posted by rdaily under CFP | Tags: sociology | 0 Comments

Though Émile Durkheim, Max Weber, and Georg Simmel are generally regarded as the “founders” of sociology as a discipline, sociological theory was actually rooted in nineteenth-century culture as intellectuals and scientists attempted to make sense of the political, economic, and social dislocations brought about by the Industrial and French Revolutions. Auguste Comte (who coined the term “la sociologie” in 1838), John Stuart Mill, Harriet Martineau, George Henry Lewes, Karl Marx, Henry Mayhew, Herbert Spencer, and Charles Booth were among the primary exponents of “the scientific study of society” during the Victorian era; significantly, their work often responded to or was informed by myriad literary authors and forms.

This volume represents the first collection of essays to illuminate the historically and intellectually complex relationship between literary studies and sociology in nineteenth and early twentieth-century Britain. As Samuel Kerkham Ratcliffe noted in a December 1909 paper read before London’s Sociological Society, “Sociology and the English Novel,” the “difficulty is not to discover sociology in fiction, but to find anything therein that is without sociological value and meaning.” This point has been more recently amplified by Wolf Lepenies, in Between Literature and Science: The Rise of Sociology, and Krishna Kumar, in “Sociology and the Englishness of English Social Theory,” who both have sought to account for Britain’s relatively slow professionalization of sociology before 1950 by citing the fact that “for the English their poets, novelists, and literary critics seemed to be doing a more than adequate job of analysis and criticism of the novel problems of nineteenth-century industrial society” (Kumar 55). With these observations in mind, we invite essays that will help to address some key questions.  How, precisely, did Victorian and Edwardian literary texts did help to develop and formalize the discipline of sociology? How did emergent sociological discourses and practices shape the literature of the nineteenth- and early-twentieth century?  To what degree were literature and sociology offering competing systems for analyzing the society they purported to represent?

We welcome papers that consider the sociological provenance of specific Victorian and Edwardian cultural objects and practices or papers that explore how various social theories and theorists were inherently tethered to or inspired by the literary. We especially encourage submissions that explore problems in and of the social through the “contact zones”  of literary studies and sociology. Essays might examine one or more specific examples of “the scientific study of society” and consider the degree to which these proto-sociological texts are themselves amenable to rhetorical, ideological, formal, historical or other permutations of “literary” analysis.  Contributors might discuss how specific literary works represent persons, institutions, or methods of thought associated with sociological theory and practice, and/or whether such literary works contributed to an emergent sociological discourse (or discourses). We also invite papers that explore how nineteenth- and early-twentieth century literary texts contributed to the expansion of sociology as a discipline and/or anticipated the later theoretical interventions of Erving Goffman, Pierre Bourdieu, Anthony Giddens, etc.  In addition, sociological accounts of the role of literature in the formation of national identities, classes, or class fractions in Victorian or Edwardian England would be welcome.  This list is meant to be suggestive rather than exhaustive.

We are currently soliciting proposals (300-500 words, plus one-page CV) for essays of roughly 6000-8000 words. Proposals should be sent to [email protected] by or before December 15, 2017.

Maria K. Bachman, Professor and Chair                                    
Department of English
Middle Tennessee State University                                             
 
Albert D. Pionke, Professor
Department of English
University of Alabama

 
0 Comments Read full post »

September
4
2017

Call for Contributors: New Blog on Teaching Britain and the World

Posted by rdaily under CFP | Tags: teaching | 0 Comments

  

The British Scholar Society is pleased to announce a new venture, a blog on Teaching Britain and the World. This serves as a call for authors who would like to contribute to this blog with a post that is no longer than 1000 words. As historians, most of us are not only researchers, but also academic teachers, and we are keen to foster the dialogue about your different experiences, plans and projects in the university classroom. The (by no means exclusive) list of possible subjects includes teaching methods, the challenge of balancing research and teaching obligations, the construction of syllabi, the use of primary sources, the impact of current affairs and public debates on classroom discussions, language barriers, and much more. In order to make this as broad a discussion as possible, we are keen to include colleagues at every level of their career, who study any period from the seventeenth century to the present, teach at a variety of academic institutions, and come from both Anglophone and non-Anglophone backgrounds. We are also keen to include student perspectives. The only requirement is that the blog entry has to focus on the specific challenges of teaching the history of Britain and the World. The North American Conference on British Studies will be collaborating and cross-posting these entries on their blog, the British and Irish Studies Intelligencer. If you have an idea for a blog entry, please get in touch with Dr. Helene von Bismarck at [email protected]

 

 

 

 

0 Comments Read full post »

August
15
2017

Q&A with Thomas W. Laqueur

Posted by rdaily under Interview | Tags: cultural history, death, Laqueur , stansky | 0 Comments

Q&A with Thomas W. Laqueur

Helen Fawcett Professor of History, University of California Berkeley

Winner of the 2016 Stansky Book Prize for

The Work of the Dead: A Cultural History of Mortal Remains (Princeton University Press, 2015)

 

How did you become interested in this topic?

 I have always been interested in death but my academic engagement began when I was a graduate student almost fifty years ago and read about the deaths and funerals of students in the Stockport Sunday School Memorial Book from the early nineteenth century. I used evidence from this source in the book in 2016.

Did any specific elements of your training as an historian prove to be useful to this project?

The Princeton of my graduate student days encouraged thinking big and eclectically.  My teachers—Lawrence Stone and Tom Kuhn in particular—had big theoretical and empirical  stakes in their work. At Oxford I had the privilege of working different sorts with historians who had a deep and intimate knowledge of local particularities. I think I had the best two worlds. 

Which archives and/or collections did you find most helpful?

When I began to work on what became my book I wrote to every local history archive and local record office in England. I must have picked up magpie like something from scores of them. As the project progressed new libraries and archives suggested themselves; archaeological reports at the Museum of London and the archives of the Imperial War Graves Commission and the Imperial War Museum for example.  I must in the end of visited nearly a hundred archives and libraries and picked up something useful in most of them.

Did you make any particularly important archival findings? Was there a moment when you felt like you had achieved a breakthrough in your research?

The breakthrough in this project as in all of work came when I was able to recognize and articulate clearly the historical problem that had been motivating me without my being able to say precisely how and why. There were of course moments when an archive opened up a new avenue of thought and research but the really important moment came when I recognized that the question I had been pursuing was at once foundational—why do we care for the dead—and locally specific—why do we care for the dead in particular places and ways at particular moments.

Does your project engage other disciplines? If so, which ones, and how?

My work has always engaged other disciplines. Historical anthropology dominates my most recent book; my college major in philosophy and continued engagement with certain figures—Hume most importantly but also others—informs all my work; medicine and biology were essential to the two before my latest. (I spent eighteen months in medical school to gear up for them.)  And two of my closest intellectual soul mates—Catherine Gallagher and Steve Greenblatt—are  English.

Do you have any advice for graduate students and early career professionals as they begin research projects or embark upon the writing process?

Three things:

 1. Think concretely. What do you really want to know and how might you find out? Begin there and not with some claim you want to “prove.”

2) Also think broadly. A great German historian who had been a student in Meinecke’s famous Berlin seminar before the Great War and had retired from Berkeley took me aside my first week here as a twenty seven year old assistant professor and told me that “the task of the historian is to connect the particular with the cosmic.’ I tell that to my students.

3) Heed the pleasure principle. Your work should be fun.

What did you find to be the most challenging part of the project?

 Figuring out what it was about.

 What was your most surprising revelation or important conclusion?

That while there are all sorts of religious and metaphysical reasons to care for the dead and that people in many instances act on these they are neither sufficient or necessary to explain the role of the dead in human affairs. The dead matter whatever one actually believes about them.

 Does your project have any particular relevance to the contemporary—political, social, cultural, etc.?

 Not a week seems to go by when there is not some news story about the destruction of graves, the naming of the dead, the building of memorials or some related topic.

What are you working on next? Will you be pursuing related research questions or turning to something completely different?

I am working on a book about why dogs matter to humans. I begin with art.  This is a wholly new project. I am also starting to work with Seth Koven on a book about the history of humanitarianism that builds on some earlier articles. 

0 Comments Read full post »

Categories


2016
2016 annual meeting
AFIHR
AHA
Announcement
Award
BISI
BISI,
Blog
blog post
Brexit
British and Irish Studies Intelligencer
Call for Editors
CFP
conference
conference, NACBS 2014
Conferences
Digital Humanities
Editorials
endorsement
executive director
Grants and Awards
h-albion
IHR
Interview
JBS
Jobs
MACBS
meeting minutes
member news
MWCBS
my NACBS
MyNACBS
NACBS
NACBS Membership Offers
NECBS
new book
Obituaries
obituary
op-ed
pedagogy
photographs
Pre-dissertation award
Priya Satia
Prize
prizes
publication
reception
Regionals
report
RHS
SCBS
Seminar
Teaching
Test
test category
Trump
walter d love prize

 

Affiliated Organisations