[lit-ideas] Re: Purpose of the "Literature and Ideas" List with the Digest and Archive

  • From: "Judith Evans" <judithevans1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sat, 29 Jul 2006 12:59:34 +0100

> The purpose of the list, in regard to those rules relevant or
> pertinent to my interests and as understood in rough summary by
me, is
> that it should be used responsibly as a learned forum to
discuss
> topical ideas in relation to "published" literary writings,
where such
> literature is deemed to be in the form of both fictional and
> nonfictional works

That isn't quite correct.  Lit-ideas was set up following the
closure of
Phil-Lit, "ideas" is (I believe) an attempt to avoid a suggestion
that
the original list's title had been poached.  Though various of
its
members are or were professors (not only of Philosophy and
Literature),
it has always been fully open to non-academics, so if "learned"
carries
a professional or disciplinary connotation, then it's
misconceived.
The official Freelists description ("for university professors in
the
humanities to discuss the impact of technology") is an attempt to
comply
with freelists' requirements but is in my view misconceived; I'd
prefer another description even if freelists had to be abandoned
as a result.

The Guidelines on the List's web page (linked to at freelists)
state

"Acceptable topics include discussions about books, ideas, and
related topics."

> Another problem is whether learned scholars in academia are
prepared
> to share their coveted ideas in websites on the internet that
are
> accessed virtually at will by the public;

It is my impression that they are; see the discussions at The
Valve and
elsewhere.  (I may have ceased being a "learned scholar in
academia"
by the time Phil-Lit, based at tamu, so, not archived on the web,
was set up,
so cannot speak personally for them.)  More, if the concern is
that "coveted
ideas" may be poached, I assure you, wearing my former hat and as
a poachee,
that fellow lsias are the likely thieves, not the public.  But
perhaps
you are more concerned with the thought that your pearls may be
cast
before swine?  Whichever: we lack a university home, and have
done since
Phil-Lit's closure.

******
List members sympathetic to a modified version of your
suggestions (e.g.
that there be a greater number of posts conforming to a
philosophy/
literature rubric) may be slightly alienated by your emphasis on
learned scholars and coveted ideas.  Perhaps you could consider
rewording
your points

Judy Evans, Cardiff, UK


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Frances Kelly" <frances.kelly@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; "lit-ideas digest users"
<ecartis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2006 11:43 AM
Subject: [lit-ideas] Purpose of the "Literature and Ideas" List
with the Digest and Archive


> Frances with thanks to listers...
>
> This online list called "Literature and Ideas" is seemingly
free and
> open to the internet public at large who wish to enter its
portal, and
> with little invite or limit. There is clearly however a stated
> guideline of rules for this list as issued by its owners and
managers.
> The purpose of the list, in regard to those rules relevant or
> pertinent to my interests and as understood in rough summary by
me, is
> that it should be used responsibly as a learned forum to
discuss
> topical ideas in relation to "published" literary writings,
where such
> literature is deemed to be in the form of both fictional and
> nonfictional works. The broad literary ideas under discussion
could
> presumably be "within" the writings or "about" the writings,
where
> such writings are held to variously be statements in texts or
> narratives in documents or discourses in manuscripts.
>
> Many of the messages posted however often appear atopical and
even
> trivial or silly to me. This makes the storage of messages in
the list
> archive bulky, and the retrieval of messages from the list
archive for
> reasons of say research very cumbersome. This thorny issue no
doubt
> has likely surfaced here in the past before my time, but in
light of
> recent flows it may justify resurrection.
>
> Without suggesting any kind of censored policing of
"appropriate"
> messages posted to the list, some sort of voluntary process or
> protocol might nonetheless now be warranted, at least to serve
the
> interests of those listers who may wish to follow a somewhat
narrower
> threaded path when discussing topical subjects or special
themes in
> keeping with the stated purpose of the list as to what is
acceptable.
> This list after all is a valued resource, and ought not be
disused or
> abused or misused, for reasons that for example would be
clearly
> outside either the general purpose of the list or any special
topic on
> the list that is trying to stay within that purpose.
>
> My fear is that my stance in this regard may be overstating the
case,
>
> but then perhaps not. In any event, any suggestion or
correction to
> this position would be welcome. My motive here is not to bypass
or
> overstep the list authorities, but to be better informed by
listers
> who might share my particular scholarly interests in "sign"
theory.
> Those interests partly include the comparison of angloamerican
> philology and semiotics with francoeuropean semiology and
> structuralism, and the application of such "sign" theory to the
field
> of "literature" both as humanal art in the fictional and
philosophic
> manner, and as nonart in the technical or scientific manner.
Other
> lists such as the Dewey List and the Peirce List and the
Aesthetics
> List do of course provide some satisfaction.
>
> Another problem is whether learned scholars in academia are
prepared
> to share their coveted ideas in websites on the internet that
are
> accessed virtually at will by the public; but that is a further
topic,
> and there is certainly enough in this present message to
discuss.
>
> Frances Kelly, City of Toronto
>
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: