Retrospective: Pforzheimer Visit

Members of the RRG viewed the “Shelley’s Ghost” exhibit, followed by a visit to the Pforzheimer Collection, where the curator, Elizabeth Denlinger, showed us several items from the collection that were not included in the exhibit.

Among the highlights of the exhibit was a notebook of Shelley’s containing a revision of Queen Mab. The exhibit itself is wonderfully curated to tell the story not only of Percy Shelley’s life and the afterlife of his poetic reputation, but of the Godwin’ Wollstonecraft-Shelley family more generally. There were a number of letters on display from various members of the Godwin-Wollstonecraft-Shelley family, including Harriet Shelley’s suicide letter, which I found rather poignant. Along with printed books and manuscripts, the exhibit includes several other artifacts, from hair jewelry and portraits to Shelley’s guitar and fragments of his skull. The ornate rattle with golden bells from Shelley’s childhood helped me grasp just how wealthy his family was.

On our visit to the Pforzheimer we examined several interesting texts, including early editions of Lyrical Ballads, Robinson’s Lyrical Tales, and the manuscript of the sixteenth canto of Byron’s Don Juan. But along with these more canonical texts, Liz Denlinger displayed lesser-known texts and items of Romantic-era ephemera.

Most interesting to me, given my work on education in the period, were the children’s books and educational toys. The collection includes an item described as a “Lilliputian Library,” a wooden box about 6” tall containing two rows of tiny books of children’s stories. A didactic children’s board game entitled “A Game of Genius,” in which children learned about inventions such as the telegraph and gunpowder, featured beautiful color lithography. Most intriguing was a toy Denlinger described as a “peep show” (and no, not that kind). It looked like a small book with an opening cut into the front cover, but it consisted of paper folded accordion-style, the “pages” inside cut and colored so that when you looked through the hole, you saw a detailed diorama with beautiful perspective.

I plan on returning soon to read some educational texts for my dissertation, but suspect I may need to find an appropriate conference to attend just to justify examining more of these fascinating toys and games!

If you are interested in conducting research at the Pforzheimer Collection, please contact Elizabeth Denlinger.

http://www.nypl.org/locations/schwarzman/pforzheimer-collection-shelley-and-his-circle

Veronica Goosey

Retrospective: “Modern Nature, or, Imagination Revisited” by Anahid Nersessian

On Wednesday, April 18, 2012 Anahid Nersessian, Assistant Professor at Columbia University, came to give a talk at NYU entitled “Modern Nature, or, Imagination Revisited.”  Her engaging and provocative talk proposed a new formulation of form based on the relationship between ecological disaster and the rise of realism.

While Nersessian provided two intriguing examples in her talk, in her response, Maureen N. McLane, Associate Professor of English at NYU, answered the question of how Nersessian’s formulation might be more widely applied. With examples ranging from the most canonical of Romantic poetry to ancient ballads, McLane illustrated the applicability of Nersessian’s proposed form as an heuristic  of adjustment.

Graduate students from NYU, Stony Brook, and other local NYC universities engaged in a discussion with the professors regarding the theoretical and practical implications of Nersessian’s argument for literary study.

Veronica Goosey

Audience mingles post-discussion. Anahid Nersessian and Maureen McLane center background.

NYURRG Organizer Omar F. Miranda moderated the event.

NYURRG Organizer Randie Sessler engages audience members before the event begins.

Graduate students mingle post-discussion. Cliff Siskin and Anahid Nersessian in left background.

Looking Back on Fall 2011 and What’s to Come . . .

As this semester winds down, we’d like to recap some of our accomplishments from the past few months:

  • Our inaugural event in September on ‘Visionary Poetry and Romanticism’ featured a lively discussion of Blakean and Coleridgean takes on Visions, the Visual, the Visionary, and the aesthetic sphere. We were fortunate to have various GSAS students and fellow NYC-area Romanticists in attendance along with special guests Larry Lockridge and Maureen N. McLane.
  • In October, we held a Graduate School of Arts and Science-wide event on “Getting it Published,” a talk with William Germano and Cliff Siskin about the tricks of the trade to getting an article published or a dissertation converted to a book. We were pleased to host over 50 grad students and were able to sell copies of Germano’s two books, Getting it Published: A Guide for Scholars and Anyone Else Serious About Serious Books and From Dissertation to Book.
  • After submitting a proposal for a staged reading of Byron’s Sardanapalus to the artistic directors of the Red Bull Theatre (http://www.redbulltheater.com/), they have agreed to collaborate with us on this potentially large event scheduled for next Fall 2012!  In addition to hosting a staged reading of the play at their venue with professional actors, we expect to turn this performance into a larger discussion among textual and performance scholars as well as performers and artistic directors. This conversation will conceive of Byron’s play as a mode of inquiry into the varied approaches these various players bring to a text. We imagine that a collaborative essay will arise from examining this complex process from the moment rehearsals begin at Red Bull through the discussion that follows the staged reading. More info to come shortly!
  • As a team, the organizers of our group are also working on a collaborative essay on Coleridge’s “Kubla Khan” and Wordsworth’s  “Lines . . . above Tintern Abbey” based on some valuable discussion from our inaugural event on Romanticism and Visionary Poetry. More on this soon, too!
  • We have reached out to representatives from Columbia’s Center for New Media Teaching and Learning (CCNMTL) to give a talk to our English department about their new software, Mediathread, an analysis tool (similar to Blackboard) that can import images and videos from a range of digital collections into a course-specific website. These visual objects can then be annotated, organized, discussed, and embedded into multimedia essays. Definitely very cool stuff! We expect to plan this talk for February 2012.

As we look ahead to next semester, we will naturally continue working on our “Kubla Khan”/”Tintern Abbey” paper, solidify our plans with Red Bull Theatre for the staged reading of Byron’s Sardanapalus (did we mention professional actors?), and set a date for Mark Phillipson’s talk on MediaThread for the faculty and grad students of our English Department.

However, we are hoping to organize some additional events. Ideally, we’d expand the ideas we considered with the visionary and visual from our inaugural event by looking into notions of prophecy and futurity. We are thinking about having a faculty panel focusing specifically on this rich and complex material; perhaps the structure would include one main talk and one faculty respondent.

We are also considering hosting one broader NYC-wide Romanticist event featuring some local scholars chatting about some cool Romantic-specific topics. We’ve only just begun thinking about this, but please stay tuned for more info soon!

On a final note (for now), we couldn’t be more pleased with the results this blog medium has helped produce; it has not only served as a record of our many conversations but has also helped generate additional thoughts and ideas. Moreover, we’re grateful to our many followers that we’ve been able to gather in such a short time. Excited for the new and multiple possibilities ahead, we hope you’ll continue to follow along, and, as ever, we encourage your contributions, responses, and attendance at our events!

Yours sincerely,

Veronica Goosey, Omar F. Miranda, and Randie Sessler

www.nyurrg.org

Audio Recording of the Publication Event

Hello,

In case you were not able to make it to our publication panel with Bill Germano and Cliff Siskin, we have uploaded an audio recording of the event. The initial few minutes are a bit difficult to hear but hang in there – it gets much clearer right when our two speakers take over!

Click Here: Publication Panel

Introducing MediaThread

This term I’ve been visiting Mark Phillipson’s Multimedia Blake, a senior English seminar at Columbia University. As its title suggests, the course offers a non-traditional approach to William Blake’s poetry through an in-depth analysis of his written texts as much as his images. Phillipson uses MediaThread in the class, an innovative software program created by Columbia’s Center for New Media Teaching and Learning (CCNMTL) that facilitates such an examination of Blake’s multimedia production.

As the Center’s website indicates, the software “connects to a variety of image and video collections (such as YouTube, Flickr, library databases, and course libraries), enabling users to lift items out of these collections and into an analysis environment. In MediaThread, items can then be clipped, annotated, organized, and embedded into essays and other written analysis” (http://ccnmtl.columbia.edu/mediathread).

I believe the above description does more than justice to represent this fascinating tool; it brings new meaning to engaged academic communities by redefining online classroom technology. Based on my observations, the program works very well not only for its seminar purposes but also, I dare say, for new possibilities in Blakean Studies. Its zooming and “lifting out” capabilities of the minutest of details (from each digitized image) lend to fruitful observations and discussion that a view of the printed image could hardly reproduce. Through the use of digitized images from the wonderful blakearchive.org, MediaThread allows for a side-by-side analysis, for instance, of Blake’s representations of females, Los, Urizen, or even his peculiar trees. Students can also scrutinize the many versions of Blake’s images—including his varying use of color, shading, strokes, and other remarkable details.

Programs like Blackboard, Sakai, or other related course technology certainly have their merit by offering pre or post-classroom intellectual exchange, but these conversations are usually limited to written textual analysis. MediaThread enables the simultaneous analysis of text and multimedia. It allows classroom participants new entryways into a work’s material conditions, permitting the potential reframing of its production and reception history. It also prompts several questions about current forms of access to literary works—including new ways of reading and analyzing a text. With this software, students could conceivably examine other digitized images of, say, original manuscripts or rare (first) print editions. And if such a program can revolutionize the classroom, why would it (or something like it) not eventually change the sphere or direction of literary scholarship or even the broader digital humanities? The possibilities seem very exciting.

Because of its promising features , we are hoping to ask Mark Phillipson or any other member of Columbia’s team to give a presentation on MediaThread to our NYU English Department faculty and graduate students. We will provide our followers with updates about this potential event in the near future.

-Omar F. Miranda

Welcome Bill Germano and Cliff Siskin!

Image

WELCOME BILL GERMANO AND CLIFF SISKIN!

Attention all Graduate Students in the Humanities (from year one of the M.A. to the final year of the PhD):
The Romanticist Reading Group of NYU’s English Department presents ”From Paper to Publication” this Friday,October 21 from 3- 5 pm at 19 University Place, Room 222.

Bill Germano (former VP at Routledge/ Editor at Columbia University Press) and our very own Cliff Siskin (Co-Editor, Palgrave Studies) will discuss the many tips and insights to get your paper to the next, published level. Germano’s books will be sold at a 40 % discount courtesy of UChicago Press (See below).
All fields in the Humanities are welcome! Information is pertinent for all graduate students ranging from year one of the M.A. up to the final year of the PhD! 
Wine and other refreshments will be served.
Details:
Friday, October 21 
3 – 5 pm 
Room 222 (19 University Place).

William Germano:
Dean and Professor of English at The Cooper Union, William Germano is the author of Getting it Published: A Guide for Scholars and Anyone Else Serious About Serious Books and From Dissertation to Book. He served as editor at Routledge and has worked with numerous prominent scholar including Peter Galison, Jacques Derrida, Gilles Deleuze, Raymond Williams, and Stephen Greenblatt.

Cliff Siskin: 
In addition to publishing numerous books and articles, Professor Siskin is co-editor, with Anne Mellor, of the Palgrave-Macmillan monograph series in “Enlightenment, Romanticism and the Cultures of Print.” His subject is the interrelations of literary, social, and technological change, with a particular emphasis on print culture: both its historical formation and its current remediation in the face of the electronic and the digital.

****Both of William Germano’s Books will be sold at a 40% discount courtesy of University of Chicago Press****

Retrospective: Visionary Poetry Event

At our meeting on September 29, the Romanticist Reading Group discussed visionary poetry.  Our discussion encompassed the works of Blake, Coleridge, and Wordsworth as we threshed out the concepts of vision and the visionary as they apply to Romantic poetry, starting with a set of questions: how do we begin to define vision and the visionary? Do these definitions vary from poet to poet and from poem to poem? How are we as critics to negotiate the fact that vision serves as a central trope as well as a generic classification during the period? While Coleridge’s Rime of the Ancyent Marinere or Kubla Khan, Blake’s Visions of the Daughters of Albion—or  any of his prophecies—or even Byron’s apocalyptic masterpiece Darkness may seem more appropriate to the topic, we found ourselves preoccupied with Wordsworth’s “Lines Composed a Few Miles above Tintern Abbey, On Revisiting the Banks of the Wye During a Tour. July 13, 1798.” More particularly, we found the similarities between the framing of the “Tintern Abbey” poem and the framing of Coleridge’s “Kubla Khan” intriguing. In both cases, the writer increasingly distances himself from the visionary portions of the poem.

In “Kubla Khan,” the poet says he had a vision of “A damsel with a dulcimer” but he cannot describe or even recall the vision; he says, “Could I revive within me / Her symphony and song,” acknowledging the impossibility of actually reviving the vision. The section of the poem containing the reference to the vision is set off from the rest of the poem by its change in meter. The poet is distanced from the poem by events of the paratext referenced in the title, “Kubla Khan: Or a Vision in a Dream.” The poem recounting the vision is ostensibly the result of a dream he had during a “profound sleep, at least of the external senses” in which he “composed” a long poem, of which the printed poem is but a fragment, produced before he was interrupted by the man from Porlock. He describes the composition process as an almost magical moment: “all the images rose up before him [Coleridge] as things, with a parallel production of the correspondent expressions.” This unlikely framing of the poem’s genesis is countered by another story found in Coleridge’s note to the Crewe manuscript of the poem, in which he says the fragment was “composed, in a sort of Reverie brought on by two grains of Opium, taken to check a dysentery.” While considerably less mysterious, that the poem was composed during an opium high is considerably more credible than the preface’s account of it being composed during a dream. However, these changing accounts of the poem’s composition reveal the poet’s anxiety about recounting the visionary experience as the poet increases the distance between writer and the visionary moment.

Wordsworth displays a similar pattern of distancing in his revisions of “Tintern Abbey”. Over the course of its publication history, “Tintern Abbey” undergoes some subtle but crucial changes. When it first appeared as part of Lyrical Ballads in 1798, the full title of the poem was “Lines Written a Few Miles Above Tintern Abbey, On Revisiting the Banks of the Wye During a Tour, July 13, 1798.” In 1815, Wordsworth changed the lengthy title to “Lines Composed” instead of “Written.” Andrew Bennett reads the change in title as the poet’s attempt to disengage “the site of composition from that of inscription” (Wordsworth Writing 45). In the poem, the poet’s thoughts receive far more description than what the poet sees from his location on the Wye. In this case, ‘vision’ is more an act of the mind than of the eyes. Wordsworth wants to create distance between his experience of the River Wye and the act of writing. “Tintern Abbey” was actually written in Bristol and Bennett makes the provocative suggestion that a more accurate title would be “The Bristol Poem.” In the context of this discussion, we see two poets carefully presenting how their respective works came to be.

Both poems demonstrate their authors’ skepticism about writing their visions. Through various paratextual additions and alterations, Wordsworth and Coleridge increase the distance between themselves as authors and the visionary moments represented in their texts. Tintern Abbey was published in the 1798 Lyrical Ballads, and although it wasn’t published in print until 1816, Kubla Khan was written in the autumn of 1797 and circulated through recitation for several years, so both poems partake of a historical moment which may have contributed to their skepticism regarding the possibility of accurately recording or reporting individual perception. What might account for this anxiety about recounting visions, whether of sensory perception, mental reflection, or revelatory imagination? What about England in the 1790s promotes this skepticism?

~Veronica Goosey