{"id":20,"date":"2021-07-20T15:41:06","date_gmt":"2021-07-20T19:41:06","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/commons.princeton.edu\/hum583-f21\/?page_id=20"},"modified":"2024-12-14T16:07:04","modified_gmt":"2024-12-14T21:07:04","slug":"discussionthread","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/commons.princeton.edu\/hum583-f24\/discussionthread\/","title":{"rendered":"Discussion Thread"},"content":{"rendered":"

SEMINAR 1: We Begin!<\/strong><\/h1>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

[Class write-ups — DGB first]<\/p>\n

Great to get started!<\/p>\n

Our initial gathering, on a drop-dead-gorgeous early-autumn Wednesday, had no real reason to extend for the fullness of the two-hour-and-fifty-minute session.\u00a0 But it basically did.\u00a0 We just got going, and the conversation rolled along\u2026<\/p>\n

After introductions (great to have folks from so many different departments!), we turned first-and-foremost to the unusual wager of our class: a final collaborative<\/em> project, the nature of which we know not \u2013 as yet.\u00a0 Because we are committed to the idea that it will emerge, in the course of our work together \u2013 and we are committed to honoring the process that gives rise to something we will do as a group (exactly how Christy and I will participate is TBD, but I have been willing to do my part in past years \u2013 and have generally contributed symmetrically with the students).<\/p>\n

We talked a bit about some of the past projects that have come out of the course: the Keywords<\/a><\/em> book, for instance (also a website<\/a>); and there was the annotation exercise that was realized in a deck of cards<\/a> (finalized in 2023, but it was the 2022 class that did the work).\u00a0 And other things too \u2013 some that took formal shape, and some not.\u00a0 We also discussed the way the projects have emerged, in the past, and spent some time on the \u201cstructure\u201d that any such project has to honor (that there are components to be achieved individually, even as the whole wants to be greater than the sum of the proverbial parts).\u00a0 There are off-ramps, if we cannot get it all to work.\u00a0 But let\u2019s shoot for the stars \u2013 and hope for the best.<\/p>\n

\ud83d\ude42<\/p>\n

We also spent some time on the structure of our sessions (with our initial hour together as a group, followed by the time with our weekly visitor), and reviewed the way we will use the \u201cdiscussion thread\u201d for a series of class \u201cwrite-ups\u201d aimed at documenting our work together over the semester.<\/p>\n

The class\u2019s special relationship with the IHUM program got some air-time, as did the nature of the IHUM program itself (though it was only after the break that we dug in on the \u201cinside story\u201d of IHUM\u2019s origins \u2013 as a kind of consolation prize to the humanities after the creation of the Lewis Center pulled the arts out from under the \u201cHumanities Council\u201d).<\/p>\n

That parenthetical above actually signals some of the substance that we got into AFTER that short break.\u00a0 Because it was post-break that we rolled up our sleeves and began to talk about what the class is actually \u201cabout.\u201d\u00a0 And I hazarded that it has generally operated on two \u201ctracks\u201d in its pursuit of deeper understanding of the nature of the \u201cdisciplines\u201d (and the various ways of scumbling, crossing, and defying them):\u00a0 on the one hand, we aim to follow a kind of \u201chigh road\u201d of historical epistemology aimed at investigating the underlying conceptual rationale\/geneaology of the modern university\u2019s parsing of the domains of learning; on the other hand, however, we also try to stay mindful of the \u201clow road\u201d analysis of similar terrain, namely the \u201cfollow-the-money\u201d project of understanding how universities actually work <\/em>(which turns out to have considerable implications for what fields are available for study in what ways).<\/p>\n

And what about our title words?\u00a0 \u201cInterdisciplinariy?\u201d\u00a0 \u201cAntidisciplinarity?\u201d<\/p>\n

We have more work to do here.\u00a0 But we did circle the central fact that what organizes disciplinary endeavor in the modern university is the \u201cproduction of knowledge.\u201d\u00a0 That is what we are all here to do.\u00a0 That is what original research in a \u201cdiscipline\u201d amounts to \u2013 and each of you will need to achieve this in order to be \u201ccertified\u201d with the Ph.D.\u00a0 That degree will designate you as a person who has created original knowledge in your field \u2013 as attested by a set of acknowledged scholars in that discipline.<\/em><\/p>\n

Why take the time to scrutinize all of this in the critical\/creative way that characterizes HUM 583 (if it works!)?\u00a0 Well, the answer to that lies, in good measure, in the way that the humanistic side of this \u201cknowledge producing\u201d enterprise seems to be in relatively serious straits \u2013 indeed, may even be coming to an end in its recognizable forms.\u00a0 And that means it is seemingly necessary to think hard about where we are (and how we got here) so that we can move to someplace else!<\/em><\/p>\n

And in many ways THAT is the real program\/ambition, I think, that churns at the heart of HUM 583.\u00a0 Let\u2019s see what we can figure out!Very much looking forward to the semester together \u2013 and such a pleasure to have the chance to co-teach with Christy!<\/p>\n

-DGB<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

[CNW here below…]<\/p>\n

Am very eager to spend the semester with you all and to see what our unique combination of interests, talents, personalities, and knowledge sets will yield in the coming weeks. Was especially excited to meet students from so many different disciplines \u2013 Music, Classics, Architecture, English, French, Anthropology, History (of Science) \u2013 and to finally teach with Graham, which has been in the works for a while.<\/p>\n

This is my first seminar co-teaching experience, so I\u2019d never really thought about the extent to which one\u2019s own professorial style takes on new meanings when put next to someone else\u2019s professorial style. It is a rather intriguing feeling, and I see great potential in this new situation. There will be chances for speaking or being silent, playing devil\u2019s advocate, making jokes, brainstorming, trying out wild experiments, arguing, agreeing, etc. etc.<\/p>\n

Most of my pedagogical training has been in language teaching, and in past courses, I\u2019ve borrowed language-centric techniques and applied them to literature, philosophy, culture, film, whatever I happened to be teaching. One certainly could bring in some of those principles into an experimental course like this one \u2013 particular ways of thinking about the time allotted to students vs. profs for speaking, the accumulation of more intricate tasks throughout the session, toggling between different skill sets (vocabulary, grammar, pronunciation, etc.), which in our case might involve shifting from discussion of theory, to the anecdotal mode, to the possibilitarian mode (M\u00f6glichkeitsmensch<\/em> or possibilitarian, a term from Robert Musil\u2019s Der Mann ohne Eigenschaften<\/em> [The Man without Qualities<\/em>]), to a project-oriented or makerly headspace. Our guest speakers will surely bring their most natural pedagogical modes with them as well.<\/p>\n

A tip, if I may offer one: As a grad student, you may not receive much pedagogical training, but I encourage you to watch each of our visitors and see if you can discern anything that one might describe as a pedagogy. Accumulate as early as you can a list of ways you\u2019ve seen others impart knowledge and add them to your own storehouse for your potential future as a teacher.<\/p>\n

Re: our first session, I very much enjoyed its rather strange order, which established itself seemingly organically. The collaborative project was the first order of business (wasn\u2019t it? or it was at least alluded to) \u2013 DGB described it several times as EMERGENT, which I intuit may be one of his best-loved words \u2013 then lightning-fast introductions, some talk of class structure, then some chalk diagrams of everything from enrollment numbers to general education requirements to the arcane truths of program funding. Taking a page from the thespian arts, DGB did an impression of a wealthy donor who loves ethics, throws money at the university, then hobbles out the door. The IHUM<\/a> program was explained. Only at the end of the session did the beginning happen: We addressed the question: What is HUM 583 about<\/em>??????<\/p>\n

Our session got me thinking about how much one\u2019s perspective of the university changes from each vantage point. The ways that undergrads, profs, lecturers, grad students, staff, administrators, parents, donors, alums, etc. experience the place, make judgments about it, and move through it are quite incomparable. I hope that in the coming weeks, we will keep in mind that it is quite difficult to say anything definitive about this particular institution because it changes so tremendously depending on the subjectivity through which it is filtered.<\/p>\n

Regarding the General Education Requirements<\/a> that undergrads have to meet in order to graduate, DGB brought up the specific impact of the HA requirement (Historical Analysis) on the numbers in Kevin Kruse\u2019s 20th<\/sup>-Century American History course and other classes in the history department. Here are the other requirement categories, which, you\u2019ll see, certainly have a disciplinary (and sometimes thematic) understanding of undergrad education:<\/p>\n