the door is open
At various times I have written here about the issue of genre, literary pretentions, and gatekeeping. When I was active in academics my work and reputation had nothing to do with literary criticism, but quite a lot to do with the way social networks are constructed and maintained. The evolution of romance over the last twenty or thirty years is something that interests me.
These days there are literary scholars out there who are looking more directly at romance. Laura Vivanco has a website dedicated to Modern Romance Scholarship, and there are others as well. There's a large listserve where people interested in the genre can discuss it.
And now Vivanco and Eric Murphy Selinger have put out a call for papers. They're putting together an edited collection of essays called "Nothing but Good Times Ahead: the novels of Jennifer Crusie".
There's nothing unusual in academia about putting together a conference or book that focuses on analysis and discussion of the work of one author. What is new (and welcome) is the fact that in this instance, the author not only writes romance novels, but also is one of the genre's best and most eloquent representatives. And she's funny.
The radiant Robyn Bender sent me the headsup. I had been aware of the listserve, without ever venturing into the discussion.
What went through my head when I read this call for papers was this: oh yeah. I remember this. When I was a full time professor, I wrote two or three submissions a year, usually for conference papers in my area of specialization. After enough time in academics you can put together a proposal without a lot of work. You send it off, and if it gets accepted, you sit down and put it together. I probably did forty or so submissions and wrote up thirty of them. Sometimes academics write up a proposal for less than ideal reasons. Say, the conference is taking place in Paris. Or Hawai'i (although this is less likely for linguists; orthodontists and real estate agents go to places like Hawai'i. Linguists go to Urbana, Walla Walla, Tallahassee.) A few of my submissions that turned into conference presentations and/or published papers (the ones I could grab most quickly from my harddrive):
Normal People with a Normal Language: Accent, Standard Language Ideology and Discriminatory Pretext in the U.S. Courts (Glasgow, Law & Society Annual Meeting 1996)
Social Class, Authority, and the Origins of a Standard Language Ideology for Sixteenth Century German (Toronto, MLA, 1993)
Language Ideology, Appropriacy Arguments and the 'Language of Wider Communication' (Orlando, AAAL, 1997)
Definitely Not Technicolor: Ethnicity, Race and the Shadow of Language Ideology in Disney Animated Film (NYU, 1997)
Standard Language Ideology in the News Media: The Propagation of Negative Linguistic Stereotypes (Stanford, NWAVE 1994)
So should I dash off a submission about Jennie's work? I've certainly given it a lot of thought. I would have something to contribute, or at least, I like to think I would. But most likely I won't do this. Not because it doesn't interest me -- it does. Besides the time crunch factor, it's a matter of mind set. I left academics a full five years ago. I'm not sure I could pick up again so easily.
However. I will look forward to reading what other people come up with.