Call for Papers | ASECS 2014 in Williamsburg

Posted in Calls for Papers, Member News by Editor on July 30, 2013

2014 American Society for Eighteenth-Century Studies Conference
Williamsburg, 20–22 March 2014

Proposals due by 15 September 2013


Governor’s Palace in Williamsburg, Virginia. The original structure was built between
1710 and 1722, with further additions made in the 1750s. Fire destroyed the
main house in 1781. The present building was constructed in the early 1930s.
Photo by Larry Pieniazek, 2006, from Wikimedia Commons.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

The 2014 ASECS conference takes place in Williamsburg, 20–22 March. Along with our annual luncheon and business meeting, HECAA will be represented by two panels chaired by Denise Baxter and Amy Freund and Jessica Fripp. In addition to these, a wide selection of sessions that might be relevant for HECAA members are also included below. A full list of panels (68 pages’ worth!) is available as a PDF file here.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Anne Schroder New Scholar’s Session (Historians of Eighteenth-Century Art and Architecture)

Denise Amy Baxter, 1304 Edgewood Court, Carrollton, TX 75007; denise.baxter@unt.edu

Named in honor of the late Anne Schroder, this seminar will feature outstanding new research by emerging scholars.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Selfhood and Visual Representation in the Eighteenth Century (Historians of Eighteenth-Century Art and Architecture)

Amy Freund, Texas Christian U. and Jessica Fripp, Parsons The New School for Design; a.freund@tcu.edu and frippj@newschool.edu

This panel will consider the relationship between the visual arts and new ideas of selfhood in the eighteenth century. Enlightenment-era debates about the nature of the self had profound effects on how people imagined the individual’s place in society, how gender, age, and racial difference were framed, how science and medicine conceived of the mind and body, and how emotions such as love and friendship were understood and expressed. Some scholars have approached the question of the eighteenth-century self in terms of the rise of possessive individualism, of secularization, and of consumer culture; others have pointed to the persistence and transformation of traditional hierarchies, of collective identities, and of mysticism and the irrational. We are seeking papers that examine the visual representation of the eighteenth-century self, both in portraiture and in other genres and modes, including (but not limited to) genre and history painting, architecture and the decorative arts, dress, and material culture. We encourage proposals that deal with the eighteenth-century self in Asia, Africa, and the Americas, and with the transformation (or inapplicability) of Enlightenment ideas outside of Europe.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Global Cities (Cultural Studies Caucus)

Robert Markley, Dept. of English, 608. South Wright Street, U. of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801; rmarkley@illinois.edu

This session will explore the problems of urbanization during the long eighteenth century, with specific emphases on trade, infrastructure, social and political organization, ecological problems, waste disposal, health and sanitation, transportation, and so on. Papers on cities not located in western Europe or on the North American seaboard are particularly encouraged.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

The Sympathetic Object (Cultural Studies Caucus)

Lucinda Cole, Dept. of English, U. of Southern Maine, Portland, ME 04104; lcole323@gmail.com

This panel seeks new approaches to problems of intersubjectivity and the discourse of sympathy during the long eighteenth century. Papers that draw on object-oriented ontology, material feminisms, thing theory, medical history, and animal studies as they may relate to eighteenth-century studies are particularly welcome.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Digital Approaches to the Material (Digital Humanities Caucus)

Tonya Howe, Dept. of English, Marymount U., 2807 North Glebe Rd., Arlington, VA 22207; thowe@marymount.edu AND Mark Vareschi, Dept. of English, U. of Wisconsin-Madison, 600 North Park St., Madison, WI 53706; vareschi@wisc.edu

This panel, sponsored by the ASECS DH caucus, solicits work addressing the role of the digital humanities in the study of eighteenth-century material culture. How can digital approaches help us theorize, imagine, or represent the objects and experiences of a lived world? What challenges does material culture pose for the digital humanities? What is the relationship between the study of material culture and the digital humanities, conceived as an ethos of practice? Topics might include theatrical performance, public and private space, print culture, the circulation of objects. We seek a variety of approaches–project overviews, theoretical work, individual critical examinations–and are open to non-traditional presentational formats. Please send brief proposals, including a statement of presentation format, to co-chairs Tonya Howe (thowe@marymount.edu) and Mark Vareschi (vareschi@wisc.edu)

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Beyond Goya: Culture High and Low in Spain during the Reign of Carlos IV 1789–1808 (Ibero-American Society for Eighteenth-Century Studies)

Janis A. Tomlinson, 209 Mechanical Hall, University of Delaware, Newark, De. 19716; jat@udel.edu

The Spanish artist Francisco Goya y Lucientes (1746–1828) has long been central to discussion of culture in Spain during the two decades immediately preceding the Napoleonic invasion of Spain. This session poses the question: How would we consider the culture of this period had Goya not existed? Royal patronage extended far beyond Goya’s portraits and frescos to involve a wide range of artists in projects such as the gardens and casitas of Aranjuez and the Pardo. Scientific expeditions, historical research and progressive education incentives found new support. Theatre flourished as the plays of Moratín were performed alongside the works of seventeenth-century playwrights, opera, sainetes and tonadillas; thrill-seekers could marvel at demonstrations of hot-air balloons, automatons, or magic lantern shows. Readers might be entertained by Cadalso and satires of the fashionable characters in Madrid and beyond or by translations of French and English novels. Papers are invited discussing these and other manifestations that look beyond Goya to expand our understanding of the cultural world in Spain during this period.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Sex and the City: Doing the Italian Grand Tour (Italian Studies Caucus)

Irene Zanini-Cordi, 625 University Way, Modern Languages and Linguistics, Florida State U., Tallahassee, FL 32306-1540; izaninicordi@fsu.edu

The avid eyes and fervid imaginations of eighteenth-century Grand Tourists roved over Italy’s exotic landscapes, monuments, ruins, and people. Whether deliberate exploits or accidental encounters, whether welcomed, repulsed, or something in-between, travelers’ experiences in Italy were often marked by the sensually heightened and sexually titillating. How were Italian cities and spaces sexualized by the tourist’s gaze, and what were/are the consequences of this process/practice? This panel will consider two kinds of contributions: those exploring the interaction between the physical and social spaces of Italian cities and the sensual/sexual perceptions, expectations, and actions/habits of male and female tourists, and those exploring Italians’ perceptions of and responses to tourist behaviors while doing visiting their cities.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Anglo-Italian Linguistic, Literary, and Cultural Relations in the Eighteenth Century (Italian Studies Caucus)

Francesca Savoia, U. of Pittsburgh, Dept. of French and Italian, 1328 Cathedral of Learning, Pittsburgh, PA 15260; Savoia@pitt.edu

This session solicits contributions from scholars of Italian and British linguistic, literary and cultural history, interested in the interplay between the two cultures, and the role that wealthy grandtourists, itinerant scholars and artists, expatriates and foreign residents of both nationalities had in it. Papers may address one or more of the following aspects: reception of important works; the classics as cultural mediators, editorial projects and policies (translations, adaptations, borrowings etc.); travel logs, personal diaries and correspondences; foreign language pedagogy; unavoidable “triangulations” between Italy-France-England.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

The Reception and Influence of Scottish Arts and Letters in Europe and America (Eighteenth-Century Scottish Studies Society)

Deidre Dawson, Michigan State U., c/o Richard B. Sher, Executive Secretary, Eighteenth-Century Scottish Studies Society, New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark, NJ 07102-1982; Dda1789@aol.com

This will be a traditional paper panel, with 3-4 scholarly papers on the topic of the reception and influence of Scottish literature and art on the European continent and in North America, from the colonial era throughout the early years of the new American republic. Since ASECS will be meeting in Williamsburg, the focus on the influence of Scottish Enlightenment arts and letters both Europe and early America seems appropriate.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Historical Re-enactment, Living History, and Public History: Theorizing Generative Intersections between Tourists, Communities, and Scholars (Society of Early Americanists)

Joy A. J. Howard, 5600 City Ave, Saint Joseph’s U., English Dept, Philadelphia, PA 19131; Joy.Howard@SJU.edu

This panel will explore methodologies and theories concerning public history’s relationship with the academy. We seek to explore generative intersections between scholars of early American studies/the long Eighteenth Century and historical re-enactors, as well as between the classroom and the museum. We welcome brief abstracts from scholars, museum researchers, archivists, re-enactors, and public historians. What effective bridges have you built between re-enactors and academics or between tourists and scholars? How can we build more mutually beneficial relationships that lend themselves to broader public understanding of the long Eighteenth Century? How have you used living history in your classroom too teach history or literature of colonial America? We especially invite papers that theorize living history of marginalized individuals, women, enslaved people, indentured servants, and Indigenous peoples, as well as papers that explore ways to bridge public historians, the college classroom, and academia. In what ways can living history work to challenge, engage and educate while entertaining?

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Festival Theatre and Boulevard Culture in the Eighteenth Century: New Perspectives / Nouvelles perspectives sur le Théâtre de la Foire et la culture des boulevards (Society for Eighteenth-Century French Studies)

Nathan D. Brown, 1800 Jefferson Park Ave, Apt. 502, Charlottesville, VA 22903; ndb8e@virginia.edu

Recent work on fair and boulevard culture in eighteenth-century France has opened the door to new and innovative research on popular entertainment and culture. Indeed, in her ambitious 2002 work Le Théâtre de la Foire : Des tréteaux aux boulevards (Voltaire Foundation) Isabelle Martin compares the fair theater at the Saint-Germain and Saint-Laurent festivals to under-explored “galaxies.” Moreover, recent reprintings of Émile Campardon’s 1877 work Les Spectacles de la foire depuis 1595 jusqu’à 1791. Documents inédits recueillis aux archives nationales have facilitated the discovery by a new generation of scholars of one of the most important nineteenth century texts on the fair tradition. Taken together, these works point to the fair theater and boulevard culture as fruitful terrains – or galaxies – for further interdisciplinary research and new perspectives. Therefore, this panel, sponsored by the Society for Eighteenth-Century French Studies (SECFS), invites a variety of papers, in English or French, that interrogate questions of performance, reception, the link between text(s) and context(s), décor, material culture, class, spatial mapping, the history of ideas, the rivalry between official and non-official theater, etc., as they relate to fair and boulevard culture(s) of eighteenth-century France and beyond.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Celebrity Matters (Roundtable) (Germaine de Staël Society for Revolutionary and Romantic Studies, and the Société des études staëliennes)

Karyna Szmurlo, Dept. of Languages, College of Architecture, Arts & Humanities, Clemson U., 504 Strode Tower, Clemson, SC 29634; skaryna@clemson.edu

Today’s vibrant field of celebrity studies attests to a widespread academic interest in the phenomenon of genius, fame, wealth, and power. While Germaine de Staël’s biographers of last few years seem to be attracted to her private life scandals, the cultural/historical research unravels the intensity, range and variety of the intellectual and political relationships in which Staël was involved. Staël’s role was in every way exceptional. As the prime mover of the Groupe de Coppet—a multinational intellectual crossroads—she was central to the literary, artistic and political life of post-revolutionary Europe. At the same time she found herself on the periphery having been exiled from her native France by Napoleon. Staël made much of her status as exile and “extraordinary” woman and, having carved out a unique and prominent role, she opened herself up to criticism and ridicule. The session proposes to explore Staël’s concept of celebrity and its production, her aggressive self-promotion, as well as the ambivalence of her own literary renown and the public perception of her persona. Proposals may include, but should not be limited to the following topics: celebrity and the role of contemporary media (press, portraiture, caricatures, song lyrics, etc.); celebrity status in diverse national contexts (e.g. London, Vienna, Weimar, Rome, Moscow); rivalry in celebrity (e.g. Staël and Byron); intellectual fame and intimidation (e.g. Staël and Schlegel or Frances Burney); androgyny and fame; fame and personal sacrifices; association of success with new wealth; posthumous fame, monuments, and immortality; celebrity and public/political engagements; celebrity and political legitimacy; Paris as an ultimate locus for the performance of celebrity.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Life’s a Ball!—Women and Masquerade (Women’s Caucus Scholarly Panel)

Mary Trouille, Dept. of Languages, Literatures, & Cultures, Illinois State U; mstroui@ilstu.edu

Scholarly panel planned in conjunction with the masked ball that the ASECS Women’s Caucus will be organizing at the 2014 annual meeting in Williamsburg. All explorations of the topic of masquerade and women in the eighteenth century are invited.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Innovative Course Design

ASECS, PO Box 7867, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, NC 27109; ASECS@wfu.edu

Proposals should be for a new approach to teaching a unit within a course on the eighteenth century, covering perhaps one to four weeks of instruction, or for an entire new course. For example, participants may offer a new approach to a specific work or theme, a comparison of two related works from different fields (music and history, art and theology), an interdisciplinary approach to a particular social or historical event, new uses of instructional technology (e.g., web sites, internet resources and activities), or a new course that has never been taught or has been taught only very recently for the first time. Participants are encourage to include why books and topics were selected and how they worked. Applicants should submit five (5) copies of a 3-5 page proposal (double-spaced) and should focus sharply on the leading ideas distinguishing the unit to be developed. Where relevant, a syllabus draft of the course should also be provided. Only submissions by ASECS members will be accepted. A $500 award will be presented to each of the participants, and they will be invited to submit a twelve-page account of the unit or course, with a syllabus or other supplementary materials for publication on the website.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Orientalism in the Making (ASECS Executive Board Sponsored Session)

Claire Gallien, 3 rue de Substantion, 34000 Montpellier, France; claire.gallien@univmontp3.fr and Alexander Bevilacqua; abevilac@princeton.edu

This panel, tentatively entitled “Orientalism in the Making,” aims to unpick the different stages in the construction of orientalist scholarship, and thus seeks to rewrite the history of eighteenth-century scholarly orientalism as process, taking into account the logics underpinning its construction. In an attempt to question the seminal yet adversarial and monolithic presentation of Orientalism by Edward Said, the organisers of this panel hope to gather contributions on following topics (non-exhaustive list):
– the global networks of knowledge activated in the construction of orientalist scholarship (including inter-European, European and Asian, and inter-Asian connections, from Far to Near East);
– the comparisons between pre-published and published stages of orientalist scholarship, and the various filters and forms of (auto-)censorship shaping and policing texts and discourses;
– the status of unpublished orientalist material;
– the travels through space, from one country to the next, and time, from one generation to the next, or from seventeenth-century erudition to eighteenth-century Enlightenment, of orientalist scholarship. This could include, for instance, a reflection on manuscript collections and their impacts on later forms of scholarship, or an analysis of forms of rewriting when a late eighteenth-century orientalist took up the unfinished work of an early seventeenth-century forebear.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Artistic Matters of Life and Death in Anatomical Study: Live Models, Cadavers, and Écorché Figures

Andrew Graciano , U. of South Carolina, Dept. of Art, 1615 Senate St., Columbia, SC 29208; graciano@mailbox.sc.edu

The study of the living human model was a standard method for anatomical observation in academic life drawing classes throughout the long eighteenth century. Still other methods of anatomical study for artists continued in and outside the academic context—the hiring of prostitutes and the use of sculptural ideals are the best known. But what about cadavers, écorché figures and ‘dissectable’ wax models? How were they used? How was the artistic interaction with (and access to) them different than with living models? How are the results different? How might these figural alternatives have opened opportunities for the study of female nudity and/or an embrace of less ideal bodies? What were the prohibitions and taboos associated with studying the dead, and how did they affect the artists (visually, spiritually, legally)? How might these obstacles have been overcome in academic institutions? Where did the cadavers come from and how were they obtained? Who made écorché and wax models and how might they have been (and how are they today) considered sculptural objects in their own right?

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Eighteenth-Century Infrastructure (Roundtable)

David Alff, SUNY-Buffalo, 306 Clemens Hall, Buffalo, NY 14260; dalff@buffalo.edu

Recent years have seen intensifying scholarly interest in the relationship of public works to works of writing. Sewers, turnpikes, ports, and hospitals feature prominently in Anglophone literary imaginations from the King’s Highway of Pilgrim’s Progress to the psychiatric wards of Mrs. Dalloway. Conversely, the prose of planning literature has enabled collectivities to build themselves into being through concrete projects and fantastic utopias. This roundtable asks how an infrastructural turn in the humanities could contribute to our understanding of eighteenth-century British culture. The session invites proposals for five or six short presentations (no more than ten minutes each) from a variety of fields, including literature, history, architecture, art, music, and performance studies. Potential topics might include built solutions to crises like disease and fire, the discursive and material construction of “Turnpike-mania,” the importance of postal networks to epistolary fiction, the (in)visibility of labor in representations of civic edifices, the relationship of public spheres to public works, the applicability of a base superstructure model of the social order to Britain’s built environments, the challenge of discussing eighteenth-century infrastructure without anachronism when words like “infrastructure” bear twentieth-century coinage, and countless more.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Hogarth’s Legacy

Frédéric Ogée, Université Paris Diderot, Cabinet de la Présidence, Les Grands Moulins 4ème étage, 5 rue Thomas Mann, 75013 Paris, France; frederic.ogee@univparis-diderot.fr

On the 250th anniversary of William Hogarth’s death, this panel will consider the legacy of the artist, in British art and culture, then and now.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Anecdotal Writing in the Eighteenth Century

April London, Dept. of English, U. of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada; aklondon@uottawa.ca

Over the course of the eighteenth century, anecdote serves as an important index to genre transformation, figuring prominently in both new and established literary forms, including history, belles-lettres, essays, novel, secret history, conduct manuals, medical reportage, legal writing, biography, and autobiography. This session invites participants to consider anecdote’s ubiquity in a wide range of contexts, including its evidential importance to the developing professions of law and medicine and its centrality to modes of writing about domestic life, both privately, in memoirs, novels, and biographies, and socially, in table talk, conduct manuals, and conversation guides. I anticipate 3-4 papers from a range of disciplines.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Emotion in the Long Eighteenth Century

Aleksondra Hultquist, 3/10 Beach Ave., Elwood VIC 3184, Australia; ahul@unimelb.edu.au

The long eighteenth century has been described as a battleground between thought and feeling. Fascination with the rational and irrational, the intellectual and the emotive conflicted, competed, and combined to infuse and shape eighteenth-century thinking and experience on many levels. The History of Emotion, is undergoing a renovation and revitalization, led by scholars including Barbara Rosenwein, Sara Ahmed, and William Reddy and others, and supported by a consortium of institutes around the world such as the Australian Research Council’s Centre of Excellence in the History of Emotion and the History of Emotion Research Center at the Max Planck Institute for Human Development in Germany. Old binary models of the opposition of thought and feeling are increasingly challenged and complicated as a result of such work, revealing not only the British but also the Continental eighteenth century to be a period in which thinking and feeling, rationality and emotion, science and art were both imagined as increasingly separate modes and consistently imagined as overlapping and converging.

This panel extends the work in this increasingly influential area of eighteenth-century studies. The chair seeks papers that will contribute either to the study of particular aspects of emotion in the eighteenth century, such as the vocabulary of emotion–“the passions”, “moral sentiments”, “the cult of sensibility,” and so forth—to furthering the methodology and aims of the History of Emotion, or ideally, to both. Visual aids are encouraged.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Tanners, Blacksmiths, Shoemakers, and Others: Craftsmen in the Eighteenth Century

Yvonne Fuentes, 517 N. Lakeshore Dr., Carrollton, GA 30117; yvonnefuentes@charter.net

In 1783, a Spanish Royal Edict was issued declaring that “not only tanners, but those who practiced the art and occupation of blacksmiths, tailors, shoemakers, carpenters and others of similar trade are honest and honorable;
that their trade does not vilify or dishonor the family and individual; nor does it impede possible municipal employment…” This panel invites papers wishing to explore political, economic, or social [mis]perceptions, [mis]interpretations and [mis]representations of labor, craft skills, craftsmen and social status in the eighteenth century. We are particularly interested in, but not limited to, the following:
· Craftsmen in literature and theater
· Guilds and their economic/social clout
· Crafts and craftsmen and social status
· Decrees, edicts and other official documents regarding/regulating crafts
· Crafts, craftsmen, guilds and identity

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Rousseau and the Visual

Melissa Hyde, School of Art and Art History, U. of Florida; mhyde@arts.ufl.edu

This session invites papers that explore 1) Rousseau’s engagement with the visual arts in his work; 2) visual representations relating to Rousseau’s ideological or philosophical positions; 3) pictorial illustrations of Rousseau’s work; 4) “Blindness and insight” in Rousseau’s readers. Though papers need not be limited to these topics, the aim of the session is to consider Rousseau afresh from interdisciplinary perspectives on the visual and the visual arts.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Picture This

Laura Baudot, 10 North Professor Street, Dept. of English, Rice Hall, Oberlin College, Oberlin, OH 44074; lbaudot@oberlin.edu

I would like to propose a seminar on mental images in the long eighteenth century. From Robert Boyle’s simulation of “virtual witnessing” to the romantic poet’s visionary mind’s eye, the question of how the mind pictures things is a source of fascination across a variety of discursive traditions from the Restoration through the Romantic period. Speculation on how the outside world gets inside and how the internal world projects itself onto the external reality is a crucial dimension of aesthetics, the phenomenology of reading, natural philosophy, and moral philosophy. While I am most familiar with theories and evocations of mental picturing in aesthetic, literary, and philosophical traditions, I am eager to attract and include papers that consider the question of mental image production from other cultural vantage points, whether political, cognitive, anthropological, or psychological. My hope with this broad topic is to put together a panel that looks at mental pictures from a variety of perspectives. The best format for this would be 3 or 4 panelists, perhaps with a respondent.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Tobacco and Coffee

Paula Radisich, Dept. of Art and Art History, Whittier College, 13406 Philadelphia Street, Whittier, CA 90608; pradisich@whittier.edu

This session invites papers on any aspect of tobacco and coffee consumption in the eighteenth century. Participants might analyze objects, both decorative and utilitarian, like coffeepots or porcelain snuff boxes, or representations of coffee and tobacco use in texts, images, musical compositions and theatre. Papers might examine how considerations of class (pipe-smoking versus snuff) and gender (tea versus coffee) came to inflect stereotypes connected to the consumption of tobacco and coffee developing over the course of the eighteenth century.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Embodying the Past: The Rewards and Risks of Re-enactment

Mimi Hellman, Dept. of Art History, Skidmore College, 815 N. Broadway, Saratoga Springs, NY 12866; mhellman@skidmore.edu

The possibility of understanding the past by experiencing authentically re-created material environments and sensory experiences has long intrigued curators, scholars, and the general public. Many such projects engage the eighteenth century, including historic sites such as Colonial Williamsburg; the restaged South Sea voyage of Captain James Cook on the 2002 BBC series “The Ship”; and the activities of Revolutionary War re-enactors. There is a growing interdisciplinary literature on re-enactment, some of it intersecting with the attention to multimodal bodily knowledge in the field of sensory studies and the attention to emotional experience in affect studies.

Inspired by these trends, and by the conference’s proximity to Colonial Williamsburg, this session invites debate about the opportunities and challenges of embodied, object-based modes of historical inquiry. Can certain kinds of insights be gained only by replicating, inhabiting, or manipulating the spaces and artifacts of the past? What interpretative challenges and limitations does this involve? How have the aims and strategies of re-enactment changed over time? How do its subjects, tactics, and tropes express the social, political, and psychological preoccupations of the participants’ own world? Does the entertainment value of re-enactment as an amateur leisure activity and conceit for reality television undercut its scholarly potential, or can professional historians learn from popular practices? How might approaches in use at historic sites be adapted as research methods for academy-based scholars or as new pedagogies for college classrooms? Papers that highlight innovative practices, deal critically with the popular culture of re-enactment, or incorporate theoretical approaches to somatic and affective experience are especially welcome, as are proposals for hands-on demonstrations.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Gesture in the Eighteenth Century

Miriam L. Wallace, Humanities ACE-116; New College of Florida, 5800 Bay Shore Rd, Sarasota, FL 34243; mwallace@ncf.edu

Gesture is a capacious concept—incorporating embodied gesture in speaking in formal situations (courts of law, parliamentary debate, plebian debating or spouting clubs, public oration), in dance from high forms of court or elite social dance to low forms of country or folk dance, and of course on stage in theatrical performance. Gesture (including physiognomy) forms a kind of language of visual arts, from portraiture and history painting to satirical prints. It also includes more figurative concepts of gesture—poetic or musical gesture, gesture in the visual arts. Current work in arts and cognition even links gesture to inter-corporeal recognition. This panel invites considerations of gesture and its function, place, or significance in the long eighteenth century. How was gesture coded and to which audiences was it addressed? What were the dangers of gesture’s embodied state—its link to the physical body, even the failed body? How does gesture function differently when it is abstracted as in poetical or musical or painterly gesture? How is gesture tied to nationality, to race, gender, and class? Does gestural communication cross linguistic boundaries or is it not fully translatable? Finally, how do we reconstruct the languages and significances of gesture from the past—what kinds of records and documents are necessary and what do they add to our understanding of the period? Demonstrations of gesture in action–in addition to more conventional presentations (spoken, powerpoint, audio playback)– are welcomed.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Regimes of Visuality, Technologies of Vision (Science Studies Caucus)

Jess Keiser, Rice U., Humanities Research Center – MS 620, P.O. Box 1892, Houston TX 77251-1892; jk479@cornell.edu

We think of eighteenth-century science as fundamentally visual. Through the production, verification and propagation of new matters of fact, the empirical investigation of nature privileged the activities of seeing and showing to an unprecedented extent. However, the Baconian dictate to simply observe the “things themselves” in nature belied what in practice was a highly mediated and elaborated enterprise. The contriving of experiments, the fabrication of matters of fact, and their attendant protocols of verification and dissemination depended, above all, on making phenomena visible to qualified witnesses, whether those witnesses were virtual or actual, or, indeed, whether the phenomena themselves were sensible or were otherwise invisible and imperceptible. One of the two inaugural sessions sponsored by the newly-formed ASECS Science Studies Caucus, this panel seeks proposals for papers that offer fresh engagements with the ways that eighteenth-century science made knowledge visible. We invite papers that rethink the roles that spectacle, stagecraft, and performance played in the creation and representation of scientific knowledge: what we might call the regimes of visuality in eighteenth-century science. We also encourage submissions that rethink the material practices of visualizing scientific knowledge in our period: those technologies of vision that include sensory prostheses like the microscope, the telescope, and the air-pump, but which could also include perspective painting, model-making, systems of notation and transcription, scientific illustration, and so forth.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Like Animals

Karánn Durland, Dept. of Philosophy, Austin College, 900 N Grand Ave., Sherman, TX 75090; kdurland@austincollege.edu

The long eighteenth century witnessed a growing appreciation of ways in which humans resemble other animals. This recognition appears, among other places, in discussions of reasoning and action. Leibniz helps to initiate the conversation by proposing that we live for the most part “like brutes,” since three-quarters of our actions merely
follow familiar practices rather than stem from reason or theory (Monadology, section 28). Hume later observes that the same mental principles that allow us to recognize causal relationships, and as a result guide our lives, are routinely employed to comparable effects by animals (First Enquiry, section 9). Of course, similarities in cognition and behavior are not the only ones to attract attention during this period. Bentham, for instance, emphasizes a shared ability to suffer and famously urges that this alone should serve as the basis of moral consideration (Introduction to the Principles of Morals and Legislation, chapter 17). This panel explores similarities (and differences) between humans and nonhuman animals as these were addressed in philosophy, science, politics, literature, religion, art and/or law during the long eighteenth century.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Acts of Succession

Daniel Gustafson, 251 West 109th St, Apt 2E, New York, NY 10025; dgustafson@ccny.cuny.edu

2014 marks the 300 year anniversary of the 1714 Hanoverian Succession in Britain in which the troubled Stuart dynasty came to an end. But while the succession purportedly offered a resolution to the dynastic and religious conflicts of the previous century, the Stuarts – and the issue of succession more broadly – still haunt much of the long eighteenth century. This panel invites participants to discuss the impact of not only the regime change in 1714, but also the larger idea of “succession” in the Restoration and the eighteenth century. How can we rethink the literary, political, and/or religious implications of this central moment in the conflict between the Stuarts and the Hanoverians? How is 1714 used to imagine or represent the problematic concept of succession that continued to plague the century? Papers might possibly focus on one or more of the individual authors and texts surrounding the 1714 succession (or indeed any text/author concerned with the dynastic politics related to the later Stuarts more broadly); or those texts and/or authors that the succession impacted later; or the theoretical idea of succession in eighteenth-century literature, theater, history, politics, or the arts.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Un/Veiling the Body in Transatlantic Spain

Elena Deanda, Washington College, 300 Washington Ave., Chestertown, MD 21620; edeanda2@washcoll.edu

In the eighteenth century, the Spanish Empire foster the circulation of dyes, textiles, and fashions across the Atlantic. Reds from grana, blues from indigo were sent from America to Spain in order to transform lace or silk in the Netherlands or Belgium. Although in France Montesquieu considered fashion an economic propeller, in Spain, most of the enlightened ‘letrados’ despised it as a sign of moral decay. Furthermore, fashion became in Spain a matter of both state and the Church since the kingdom as well as the Inquisition aimed to control (most of the time unsuccessfully) women and men’s public image and behaviors. From tapadas in Peru, to ‘evil’ costumes in Mexico, or the art of the Spanish fan and mantilla, this panel aims to unveil the intricacies of material culture as it intersects gender, the economy, politics, and aesthetics. In the eve of the industrial revolution, clothing became in Europe a dense signifier and a place of resistance to institutional politics. We welcome thus papers that weave both text and textiles.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Native London (Roundtable)

Caroline Wigginton and Kelly Wisecup, Wigginton – Dept. of American Studies, Rutgers U., 131 George St, RAB 024, New Brunswick, NJ 08901; Cwigginton@amst.rutgers.edu; Wisecup – Dept of English, U. of North Texas, 1155 Union Circle #311307, Denton, TX 76203; kelly.wisecup@unt.edu

In light of the absence of Native Studies panels at the most recent ASECS annual meeting, the organizers are proposing two roundtables. This one, “Native London,” seeks to bring Eighteenth-Century and Native Studies together by disrupting the sense of geographical distance between indigenous North America and Europe, and examining Native presence in London. Indigenous peoples frequently responded to and commented on London throughout the eighteenth century, from the four Mohawk kings who visited Queen Anne in 1710 to the Tahitian man Omai, who traveled to England with James Cook in 1773, or the Mohegan Samson Occom, who raised funds for his mentor’s mission school in the 1760s. While studies of empire and of eighteenth-century Native literature and culture have each recently seen exciting new developments, these two areas are conventionally considered separate from one another. This panel brings the study of empire together with Native studies and asks what the metropole and the imperial networks that connected it to the colonies look like from a Native perspective. We will solicit brief papers from scholars of various disciplines and ask them to consider how Native persons interacted with London? How did they influence its history, society, politics, art, and literature? How and when can we identify London as a Native city? Together we will chair and respond to the participants.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Pop! Goes the Eighteenth Century

Guy Spielmann, Georgetown U., Dept. of French, 3700 O St., NW, Washington, DC 20057; spielmag@georgetown.edu

We scholars envision “the Eighteenth Century”—events, people, objects, intellectual and creative works, etc.—on the basis of research and extensive exposure to both original documents and authoritative secondary literature. However, to a “general audience”—which in fact includes most people, including colleagues in other disciplines and our own students—”the Eighteenth Century” is largely construed through images conveyed in various media belonging to popular culture. In addition to its most conspicuous forms, such as film and novels, popular culture has featured elements from the Eighteenth Century in a vast range of genres and formats: comics and cartoons, commercials and advertisements, miscellaneous merchandise (calendars, postcards, tee-shirts, figurines, dolls, plates…), television shows, toys, clothes and fashion accessories, performances, etc..

The purpose of this session is a critical examination of the impact that such popular culture productions exert on how the public at large envisions the Eighteenth Century. Beyond the obvious (vague chronology, anachronisms, common misconceptions, stereotyping), how exactly is this Eighteenth Century different from the one we scholars envision, and why? More importantly perhaps, given our own limited range of influence, how should we position ourselves towards such representations? Taking for granted that simple dismissal or unequivocal condemnation are not productive options, but that it is not acceptable either to merely embrace the Eighteenth Century created by popular culture in order to relate to a general audience (or try to appear cool in the eyes of our students), what can we possibly do to mediate this competing vision? The location of the 2014 conference makes this session all the more relevant since “Colonial Williamsburg” is a remarkable embodiment of a vision of the Eighteenth Century for a mass audience that rests on a mediation between historical recreation, patriotic celebration and marketing/ merchandizing for tourism. Successful proposals will
1. focus on items that have received little scholarly attention thus far (as opposed to relatively mainstream productions such as studio films)
2. examine specific works, products, genres, so as to avoid broad generalizations
3. engage the material critically, after a very brief description and/or display
4. seek to explain how the chosen materials contribute to a non-scholarly vision of the Eighteenth Century, but also why Eighteenth-Century events, works or people were chosen.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Eighteenth-Century Re-enactments

Emily Hodgson Anderson, Dept. of English, U. of Southern California, Taper Hall, Rm 402J, 3501 S. Trousdale Parkway, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0354; ehanders@usc.edu

Inspired in part by the historical re-enactments so common to our conference setting, this panel invites speakers to meditate on eighteenth-century examples of re-enactment. By re-enactment, we mean both the recycling and adaptation of texts (such as the period’s fascination with adapting Shakespearean plays, or the neo-classical tendency to recycle classical literary forms) and the restaging of historical or literary events (such as Uncle Toby’s recreation of the fortifications at Namur, or the tendency of eighteenth-century readers to re-enact fictional scenes). Most generally, the panel asks how re-enactment as a concept emerges in eighteenth-century literature, criticism, or society, and panelists are invited to theorize and historicize in response. What cultural motivations lead to the re-enactments of historical or literary events? What rules or conventions govern eighteenth-century re-enactment as a genre or social practice? What, in the process of re-enactment, a re its participants trying to recreate.
or preserve?

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Material Culture in the Atlantic World

Chloe Wigston Smith, English Dept. 254 Park Hall, U. of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602-6205; cws3@uga.edu

This panel seeks papers that investigate Atlantic World and/or intercultural forms of material culture; artifacts that circulate between countries and/or colonies; that articulate different or competing national allegiances; that are shaped by multiple aesthetic influences. Papers might engage the relations between material culture and global trade, empire, commerce and/or slavery. I welcome interdisciplinary approaches and hope the panel will feature scholars working in different disciplines. Please send abstracts of 500 words.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Materials, Artistic Process, and Meaning in the Eighteenth Century

Sarah Betzer and Douglas Fordham, U. of Virginia, McIntire Dept. of Art, PO Box 400130, Charlottesville, VA; sbetzer@virginia.edu or Fordham@virginia.edu

How did raw materials used by artists inflect the process, circulation, or interpretation of the arts in the long eighteenth century? The century in which the “modern system of the arts” was solidified was also one in which writers like Lessing and Herder devoted considerable energy to establishing the philosophical underpinnings of enduring distinctions between media. This session aims to return to the question of the raw materials of artistic process through the widest possible lens in order to consider how such materials as canvas, pigment, copper, paper, ivory, ink, stone, and ceramic had their own histories, experimental procedures, industrial processes, and symbolic valences. How might these histories intersect with the history of art and aesthetics? We invite papers that describe and analyze compelling intersections of raw material, creative process, and artistic and philosophical interpretation.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Representing the Global Dimensions of the American Revolution

Maria O’Malley, Dept. of English, U. of Nebraska at Kearney, Thomas Hall 204, 905 West 25th Street, Kearney, NE 68849; omalleym2@unk.edu

This session examines how literature of the late eighteenth century portrays the global dimensions of the American Revolution, its peace process, and/or its consequences. Papers may consider some of the following questions: How did writers situate the American Revolution as an event that strengthened transoceanic networks? How did other cultures – besides the US and Britain — represent the Revolution, such as the Dutch, French, Spanish, Russian? How did the Revolution change perceptions of the African slave trade or ongoing piracy wars at sea? Other topics might include how the war and its aftermath affected how other British colonies were represented, especially those in the West Indies and Australia. Panelists might also address how global dimensions of the conflict were suppressed or downplayed. Interdisciplinary approaches are welcome.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Aesthetic Experience

Brian Michael Norton, 800 N. State College Blvd., Fullerton, CA 92831; bnorton@fullerton.edu

Recent work in literary studies, analytic philosophy and neuroaesthetics has reinvigorated the concept of aesthetic experience, raising questions about the primacy of disinterestedness and bringing renewed attention to the aesthetic experiences that shape everyday life. This panel invites papers that explore the nature and varieties of aesthetic experience, especially those informed by new work on description, observation, attention, meditation, affect, wonder and judgment. In what ways could this research enlarge our understanding of eighteenth-century aesthetics (and vice versa)? Particularly welcome are papers that attempt to think together concepts of psychical distance and immediacy, detachment and absorption.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

New Approaches to Eighteenth-Century Gardens

Jeffrey L. Collins, Bard Graduate Center and Meredith Martin, New York University; collins@bgc.bard.edu and meredithmartinsiegel@gmail.com

This panel invites papers that reconsider eighteenth-century gardens from new theoretical, methodological and cross-cultural perspectives. We are particularly interested in papers that move beyond dominant design paradigms and focus instead on questions of materiality, reception and use. Papers may consider gardens in relation to imperialism and/or colonialism; diplomacy and gift exchange; global botanical circulation; and changing ideas of nature, the body, and the self. Examinations of gardens in under-represented parts of Europe, Asia and the Atlantic World are especially encouraged.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Antiquarianism (in Theory)

Ruth Mack, Dept. of English, SUNY at Buffalo, 306 Clemens Hall, Buffalo, NY 14260; and Crystal B. Lake, Dept. of English, Wright State U., 470 Millett Hall / 3640 Colonel Glenn Hwy., Dayton, OH 45435; ruthmack@buffalo.edu and crystal.lake@wright.edu

Antiquarian texts have long been mined for historical detail. And they have been mined for ways of considering historical detail: as Arnaldo Momigliano importantly argued, early antiquarians go beyond a mere recording of facts, developing the roots of a historicist methodology that remains critical for us today. But this very focus on particularity means that antiquarian texts do not seem like obvious candidates for theoretical inquiry. In this panel, we will consider how antiquarian texts speak beyond the historical. We are interested in papers that consider the ways such eighteenth-century texts themselves operate theoretically or philosophically (offering theories of history and culture, for example) and the ways more modern theory may be brought to bear on these eighteenth-century attempts to preserve the past.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

National Endowment for the Humanities Grants Projects in Eighteenth-Century Studies (Roundtable)

Barbara Ashbrook, National Endowment for the Humanities, 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Room 302, Washington, DC 20506; bashbrook@neh.gov

The National Endowment for the Humanities (NEH) has provided and continues to provide significant support for projects to advance scholarship, teaching, and public understanding in all areas of inquiry in eighteenth-century studies. These projects range from fellowships and stipends for individual researchers to programs that thousands can enjoy, such as “John Adams Unbound,” an exhibition that traveled to over twenty U.S. libraries to show how the intellectual content and historical contexts of Adams’s reading shaped and informed his world and views. In order to illustrate recent grant making activity, we propose a roundtable featuring “case studies” of successful grant projects. We focus in particular on three areas in order to represent well their priorities and programs: the Division of Research Programs, the Division of Education Programs, and the Office of Digital Humanities.

Facilitating the roundtable would be Barbara Ashbrook, Assistant Director, Division of Education Programs at the NEH. She would coordinate and contextualize the presentations by (ideally) four principal investigators of grant projects. In innovative format, each presenter would offer a brief description (not to exceed 7–10 minutes) of the content, approach, partners (if any), and products of their NEH grant; an outline of remarks would be shared in advance with the facilitator. Devoney Looser, who directed the seminar, “Jane Austen and Her Contemporaries” (summer 2012, at the University of Missouri, Columbia), has consulted on the development of this roundtable proposal, and agrees to represent the summer programs grant opportunity within the Division of Education Programs. We seek to include additional panelists who can speak to their experiences with 1) Fellowships and/or Stipends, and 2) Collaborative Research and/or Scholarly Editions grant projects funded by the NEH Division of Research Programs; and 3) any of several grant programs and special opportunities within the Office of Digital Humanities. We anticipate that the roundtable would provide a catalyst for exchange of information useful to graduate students, college and university faculty, and independent scholars interested in attracting support for their professional endeavors.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Mind and Brain: Representing Cognition in Eighteenth-Century Culture

Natalie Phillips, English Dept., Michigan State U., 619 Red Cedar Rd., Wells Hall C614, East Lansing, MI 48825; nmp@msu.edu

In the Mechanical Operation of the Spirit, Jonathan Swift mocked the “Opinion of choice Virtuosi” about the mind and brain. According to them, “the Brain is only a Crowd of little Animals, but with Teeth and Claws extremely sharp” and “all Invention is formed by the Morsure of two or more of these Animals upon certain capillary Nerves, which…branch” to inspire the creative hand or oratorical tongue. Swift’s send-up of popular Enlightenment ideas about the “animal spirits” as well as the period’s ever-multiplying theories about the systems linking brain and mind marks a crucial—and far larger—interplay between literature and science. These commentaries ranged from sophisticated literary satires of brain-based inquiry by authors from Margaret Cavendish to William Blake to popularizations using literary techniques to convey scientific ideas, as in the poetry of Erasmus Darwin. Most literature engaged with contemporary ideas about the brain, of course, offered not just praise or denigration, but complex re-workings (and thus transformations) of cognitive theory. According to David Lodge, literature offers one of “the richest and most comprehensive…record[s] we have of human consciousness.” What, then, does it say about connections between mind and brain?

This panel takes up the challenge of depicting the brain in eighteenth-century literature and culture, exploring how various authors and artists used ideas about brain and mind across genres and cultures to offer new depictions of our varied cognitive and emotional states: positive or negative, normative and not. Rather than focusing on the century’s widespread debates over the mind’s potential location in the brain—for Descartes, in the pineal gland—or about materialism at large, we expand the conversation to take up a series of broader queries about techniques for depicting thought, feeling, and cognition: How does eighteenth-century literature and art seek to represent the mind’s relationship to the brain, or its lack of it? What core metaphors helped the Enlightenment define cognitive processes, and where did these intersect (or depart from) anatomical theory? Artist Charles LeBrun, for example, defined and drew the passions by theorizing them as the result of minute shifts in physical expression: “the elasticity of the muscles,” he claimed, “receive their motion from nervous juice…the nerves act[ing] only by the spirits contained in the cavities of the brain.” How did such ideas influence the depiction of different mental states, such as curiosity, boredom, attention, wonder, and happiness, and what changed when modes of mind were thought of as brain states?

We welcome a broad range of approaches, which include philosophy of mind, intellectual history, literature and science, psychoanalysis, literary and artistic criticism, aesthetics, affect theory, performance studies, and cognitive approaches to fiction, among others. Papers might consider intersections between anatomical engravings and poetics; narrative and artistic techniques for representing embodied cognition; or the larger relationship among brain, mind, and its surrounding environment. Talks that set a work within its historical and national context and relate it to larger discussions of the mind in contemporary science, philosophy, medicine, aesthetic theory, and anatomy will be especially welcome.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Eighteenth-Century Ephemera, Textuality, and the Production of Culture

Sandro Jung, Dept. of Literary Studies, English Subject Group, Ghent U. Blandijnberg 2, B – 9000 Ghent, Belgium; Sandro.Jung@ugent.be

Since literary historians have traditionally been primarily concerned with the product of literary endeavour—the literary text—and not generally the process of producing this text, they have not generally considered ephemeral print material, unless related to the oeuvre of a major, canonic figure such as Alexander Pope. This material, related as it is to books in ubiquitous ways, includes among others, publishing prospectuses and subscription proposals, samples of printing (especially of fine-printed sections from the text advertised), booksellers’ catalogues, trade bindings containing tipped in publishers’ lists, and wrappers that would have been disposed of once the book was bound in a more durable format. Economic historians have focused on the ways in which some of these ephemera can provide evidence for studies that are concerned with the rise and proliferation of the book trade and a competitive market-place on which different editions of one and the same title can be disseminated. Social historians, by contrast, concentrate on determining the use of these ephemeral objects and the ways in which these printed materials reveal class-affiliation or the dynamics of consumer culture. Neither economic nor social history, however, highlight the dynamic relationship that these ephemera entertain with the printed text. Since literary history usually only explores the finished product of literariness and not the printed object that never developed into a literary text, its remit is limited and fails to take into account the multifarious productivity of the eighteenth-century literary market-place. Often, paper-based ephemera serve as tantalisingly evocative palimpsests of contemporaneous scholarly and editorial endeavour, of projected editions and other volumes that—for whatever reason—did not materialise. Together with the numerous advertisements and reviews printed in the periodical press of the long eighteenth century, these book trade-related ephemera reveal a largely uncharted and unexplored archive of projected ventures and volumes that did not always survive in the material form of the printed book. The print-cultural realm, however, holds palimpsestic traces of these texts, and a radically new, culturally informed history of literary ephemera will produce insights into the dynamic processes regulating the production of printed texts and the economic and social factors affecting the formation of cultural canons.

The panel organiser invites proposals on any aspect of (literary) ephemera, as well as ephemera related to the wider concerns of the production of culture, including funerary ephemera (such as cards, invitations, and elegies), fans, song sheets, chapbooks, flush money, theatre and other tickets, trade cards, and many more.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Reproducing the Past in the Eighteenth Century

Alicia Kerfoot, SUNY Brockport, Dept. of English, 211 Hartwell Hall, 350 New Campus Drive, Brockport, NY, 14420; akerfoot@brockport.edu

This session seeks papers on any aspect of the reproduction of the past in the eighteenth century. Submissions might consider eighteenth-century historical fictions, follies and faux ruins, the adaptation of ancient genres and forms, antiquarianism and the presentation of collections, the role of the middle ages in eighteenth-century aesthetics, the Gothic novel, the retelling of national histories, or the reproduction and representation of historical figures, places, or events in dramatic, spatial, architectural, or visual forms. The goal of the session is to have a conversation about questions of authenticity and about what reliving or reproducing the past—whether it was in material culture or philosophical form—meant for those in the eighteenth century. How did authors and artists, craftspeople, and even tradespeople reproduce or recreate the past for their contemporary audiences? What sense of realistic displacement were readers or viewers supposed to feel while encountering such reproductions? What roles did architecture, historical accounts, and fictional tropes play in the creation of the idea that one could be transported to another time and place through authentic reproduction? These are questions that I hope we can have a thoughtful conversation about in this session.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Ear, Nose, and Throat: The Other Senses of the Long British Eighteenth Century

Rivka Swenson, VCU, Dept. of English, 900 Park Ave., Richmond, VA, 23284-2005; RSWENSON@VCU.EDU

To date, most of the scholarship on the senses and subjectivity in the Restoration and eighteenth century has focused on the visual. This panel proposal seeks papers that will expand our sense of how the other senses— smell, hearing, touch, taste—were understood (scientifically and popularly) to shape the self. How was narrative form or structure impacted by the notion that all sensation was a form of touch? What do close readings of long eighteenth-century sense theorists tell us about the links between self and sense? What were the implications for poetics? For musical notation? For clothing, accessories, and other forms of material culture? For architecture and space? As suggested by these leading but by no means exclusive questions, this proposal seeks a diverse, robust panel that will serve open to our eyes to an array of texts and treatments. Multi-sensational topics are also welcome. Discipline open!

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Art and Literature in the Age of Industry

Susan Egenolf, Dept. of English, Texas A&M U., College Station, TX 77843-4227; s-egenolf@tamu.edu

This panel invites papers that focus upon art and literature and their relationship to industry in the long eighteenth century. Panelists should think of “industry” in terms of domestic manufacture, labor, and farming, as well as trade among Britain, the Continent, the near East, and the Western hemisphere, but also in terms of representations of “industry” as a moral imperative. Panelists might address such entrepreneurs as Matthew Boulton, Josiah Wedgwood or Robert Owen in order to illuminate the reciprocal influence of aesthetics and industry in the period. Panelists also might focus upon Houses of Industry or representations of “industry” in didactic literature. Panelists may wish to trace the movement of people and goods to and from Britain, its colonies, and the rest of the world, examining both the representations and products of industry, including shifts in the status of cottage industries, slavery, laborers, and the material objects of industrialization.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Representations of Women of Color during the Long Eighteenth Century (Roundtable)

Regulus Allen, English Dept. California Polytechnic State U., San Luis Obispo, 1 Grand Avenue, San Luis Obispo, CA 93407-0322; and Nicole Aljoe, English Dept., Northeastern U., 360 Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA 02115; rlallen@calpoly.edu and n.aljoe@neu.edu

In the introduction to the recently republished 1808 novel The Woman of Colour, A Tale, editor Lyndon Dominique suggests that eighteenth-century literary representations of black and other women of color are more prevalent and not as idiosyncratic as the criticism has suggested. Indeed, studies by Dominique, Felicity Nussbaum, Sara Salih, and others have facilitated reconsiderations of the complexities of these representations. This panel seeks short presentations (5-7 panelists, speaking 5-7 minutes each) to build upon this conversation by examining a few of the key issues and debates about depictions of women of color as we consider the impact of these representations on our understanding of eighteenth-century British literature, culture, and society. The bulk of the session will be devoted to conversation with the audience. Please contact Regulus Allen (rlallen@calpoly.edu) and Nicole Aljoe (n.aljoe@calpoly.edu) with questions or abstracts of approximately 250-500 words.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Obsessed with Origins: Primitvism and the Legitimacy of Architecture in the Eighteenth Century

Maarten Delbeke, Sigrid de Jong, and Linda Bleijenberg, Leiden U. Centre for the Arts in Society (LUCAS), Doelensteeg 16 (room 1.27), 2311 VL Leiden, PO Box 9515, 2300 RA Leiden, The Netherlands; m.delbeke@hum.leidenuniv.nl ; s.d.de.jong@hum.leidenuniv.nl ; l.m.bleijenberg@hum.leidenuniv.nl

To architectural historians, the eighteenth century presents a rich and so far not fully explored corpus of texts. In contrast to earlier periods, when architectural theory took the form of specialized treatises defining the architect’s
knowledge and the principles and models for designing buildings, the eighteenth century saw an increasing interest in architecture with authors from outside the discipline. Infusing the debate on architecture with much broader cultural preoccupations, these authors introduced new and far-reaching ways to embed architecture in culture writ large. This development is especially prominent in the debates about primitivism – the idea that any human action, institution or custom is at its purest at the moment of inception -, which informed new ways of thinking about architecture, its origins, and its role in society and culture.

In this session we aim to identify and examine some of the sources and debates that shaped the architectural theory of the era, with special attention to their use of origins. In keeping with the interdisciplinary aims of ASECS, we invite scholars with expertise in a variety of eighteenth century practices, intellectual circles, and discourses. We welcome case studies that open up wider intellectual, social and institutional contexts, or connect architecture with other artistic and scientific disciplines, such as archaeology, historiography, natural history, linguistics and ethnology. We are particularly interested in how primitivism introduced new ideas into architectural discourse – such as the religious and symbolical, rather than the pragmatic and constructional origins of architecture. Finally, we are curious to see to what degree these developments redefined the foundations of architecture’s legitimacy as a discipline, and brought them in line with widely accepted eighteenth-century modes of justification.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Sable Queens and Tawny Girls: Eighteenth-Century Women of Color in Word and Image

Leigh-Michil George, UCLA, Dept. of English, 149 Humanities Building, Box 951530, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1530; lgeorge@ucla.edu

Eighteenth-century texts and images idealize, satirize, and fetishize the “black” female body, from Aphra Behn’s literary depiction of “fair Imoinda” to crude visual caricatures of Saartjie Baartman as the “Hottentot Venus.” By investigating familiar and less well-known verbal and/or visual representations of eighteenth-century women of color, this panel aims to explore the varied and contradictory constructions of race and gender in the period. This topic is meant to invite papers on texts and/or images that examine blackness and femininity in the Americas, Europe, Africa, Asia, or Australasia. Papers addressing illustrated novels, caricatures, or other forms of word and image are particularly encouraged.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Rethinking 1688: Literary History/Liberal History (Roundtable)

Corrinne Harol, Dept. of English and Film Studies, U. of Alberta; charol@ualberta.ca

Two of the most important legacies of the revolution of 1688 were the foundation of liberalism and the beginning of modern literary history. Disciplinarily distinct and in some respects philosophically opposed at first—after all literary history was associated with Tory elite culture and tradition while liberalism imagined progress towards the abstractions of individuality, equality, and universality—these twin legacies of 1688 share a complex history of entanglements and estrangements. In nineteenth century elite theorization of the relationship of aesthetics and politics, literary history and liberalization worked cooperatively for historical progress, while under some versions of 20th-century cultural studies, literary history colluded with liberalism in its most nefarious historical effects. More recently, scholars have begun to rethink liberalism and the revolution in ways that might invite a rethinking of the history of literary history. Two recent books (by Scott Sowerby and Steven Pincus) offer fresh perspectives from which to view the revolution and its legacy, recasting the debate over the revolution as not one between ancients and moderns but rather as a competition between different visions of modernization. While Sowerby and Pincus focus on politics (toleration and political economy respectively), their work may open up new ways to think about the complex relationship between literary history and liberalism. This roundtable invites scholars working on any aspect of literary history in the long eighteenth century to collaborate on rethinking the legacy of 1688 with respect to the relationship between literary history and liberalism.

Panelists might venture specific case studies in the eighteenth-century entanglement of liberalism and literary history, or might focus more conceptually on some specific aspect of the relationship between the two. Possible topics include:
• the mutual ecologies of literary and political epistemologies, hermeneutics, and critique
• the periodization or the temporalities of literary history and liberal history
• aesthetic judgment, decisionism, and the lures of disinterest
• liberal histories of the book/histories of the liberal book
• literary circulation and/as liberal circulation
• secularization, liberalism, literary history
• literary sovereignty/liberal sovereignty
• Revolution (including 1688, the American Revolution, and/or the French Revolution) and national literary history

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

The Medicine and Aesthetics of Mobility

Kevis Goodman, U. of California, Berkeley, Dept. of English, 322 Wheeler Hall, MC 1030, Berkeley, CA 94720-1030; kgoodman@berkeley.edu

This panel will explore the intersections – both the shared ground and the growing differences – between Enlightenment medicine and aesthetics (poetry and poetics, criticism, theories of the fine arts) as these overlapping fields responded to new forms and unprecedented degrees of mobility, including new modes and routes of transportation, emigration, rural depopulation, exploration and scientific circumnavigation, and, from 1701 to 1815, nearly uninterrupted world-wide warfare. Along with the circulation of bodies and goods came new diseases and a burgeoning medical literature that explored them. This literature, in turn, was inseparable from the emergence of aesthetic theory and practice, which shared with eighteenth-century medicine an interest in physiological response. Authors of poetry, belles-lettres, criticism and theory worked in the same circles as medical writers and practitioners, drawing on the same principles of psychosomatic function and association (sometimes they were the same person, as in the cases of Schiller, Goethe, Novalis, Smollett, Goldsmith, Erasmus Darwin, and others with medical training).

Papers on all aspects of the aesthetics and medicine of mobility are invited. Interdisciplinary work that brings together the history of medicine with the history or theory of literature or the fine arts is particularly encouraged. Moreover, because the new mobilities of the eighteenth century affected experience and cultural developments not only in Britain but also in America, on the Continent, and elsewhere, I hope to include scholars of different world literatures and/or comparatists.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Napoléon and the Art of Propaganda

Heidi Kraus, Hope College, Depree Art Center, 275 Columbia Ave., PO Box 9000, Holland, MI 49422-9000; kraus@hope.edu

From approximately 1800 to 1815, Napoléon Bonaparte used official propaganda to control artistic autonomy and manipulate public perceptions of his regime both in France and throughout Europe. As a result, government-sponsored art created during the Consulate and Empire is frequently dismissed by art historians as lacking in experimentation, complexity, and beauty. Inspired by the recent exhibition Napoléon and the Art of Propaganda at The University of Iowa Museum of Art, this session seeks papers which demonstrate that, despite strict censorship laws and a dictatorial arts administration, many artists, writers, and musicians working in the service of Napoléon were deeply inspired by and passionately engaged with their prescribed “official” subjects. This session seeks a broad range of papers from across disciplines that emphasize the aesthetic relevancy of such works aside from their socio-historical significance.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Reading Texts through Colonial Williamsburg

Mary Crone-Romanovski, Dept of Language and Literature, Florida Gulf Coast U., 10501 FGCU Blvd South, Ft. Myers, FL 33965; mromanovski@fgcu.edu

This session asks participants to consider how our physical presence in an eighteenth-century city might produce new understandings of eighteenth-century texts. What does the experience of passing through an eighteenth-century house’s doorway, peering through its window or climbing its narrow (or grand) staircase reveal about the treatment of similar spaces in a novel or journal account? How does visiting the coffeehouse or blacksmith shop illuminate an essay’s treatment of civil society, commerce, or artisanship? How does wandering through the gardens at the Governor’s Palace shed light on the significance of architectural or landscape features described in a house-tour guide or a poem? What does the prospect of the surrounding landscape suggest about a period landscape painting or travel narrative? This panel invites papers that provide new readings of specific texts produced through attention to the spaces of Colonial Williamsburg as well as papers that consider more broadly how this approach might inspire new avenues of inquiry in eighteenth-century studies.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Textiles in the Long Eighteenth Century

Heidi A. Strobel, Dept. of Archaeology and Art History, U. of Evansville, 1800 Lincoln Ave., Evansville, IN, 47722; hs40@evansville.edu

This session will focus on textiles in eighteenth-century art or literature. Papers could address textiles and their production, particularly in relation to global trade networks, textiles as an artistic medium, and/or for furniture, interior decoration, or clothing. In particular, papers are encouraged that relate to appropriation through embroidered copies of other media or ones that consider the relationship(s) between textiles and gender.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Materializing Colonial America

Sophie White, U. of Notre Dame, 1042 Flanner Hall, Notre Dame IN 46556; swhite1@nd.edu

Inspired by the location of the conference in Colonial Williamsburg, this session invites proposals that address the material culture of eighteenth-century America. Papers that explore—and conceptualize—nonverbal expressions as sources for understanding the colonial period (including the lives of the non-literate, and the non-elite) will be of special interest. This session is left intentionally open so that the papers can encompass a range of topics, whether focused on dress, interiors, architecture, etc., or the intersections between these. In particular, it is hoped that these papers will showcase original approaches (whether art historical, historical, cultural, literary) to material culture subjects, and proposals that take a crossdisciplinary approach will be especially welcome.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Celebrating ‘Our King’ in an Age of Enlightenment: Commemorating Monarchs in Music, Print, and Every Day Life in the British Atlantic World

Anne Wohlcke, Cal Poly, Pomona and Birte Pfleger, CSU Los Angeles, Wohlcke: History Dept., 3801 West Temple Ave, Pomona, CA 91768; aewohlcke@csupomona.edu

This panel seeks to refocus scholarship on the fact that monarchs and monarchy were publicly celebrated figures and institutions in the everyday existence of most people in the British World. This was especially true in British North American mainland colonies where many immigrants were of non-Anglo European origin who seemed to want to obliterate ethnic differences through their public proclamations of loyalty to the British monarchy. Conversely, British monarchs were, themselves, “foreign” (Dutch and German), and using culture, including music, art and public spectacle, to negotiate their own identities as British rulers. Our panel seeks to interrogate the relationship between states, subjects/citizens, ethnic identities, notions of “rulership” and the arenas in which such concepts were performed, discussed, and celebrated. We propose to solicit a selection of interdisciplinary papers from History, Literature and/or Performance Studies that address the proposed topic.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Eighteenth-Century Book Illustration, the Engraved Author Portrait, and the Formation of the Literary Canon

Alise Jameson and Kwinten Van De Walle, Dept. of Literary Studies, Ghent U., Blandijnberg 2, B-9000 Ghent; Alise.Jameson@UGent.be and Kwinten.VanDeWalle@UGent.be

This panel invites paper proposals on the illustration of literature and the ways in which the interpretive matrixes of what Peter Wagner terms the “iconotext” contribute to a narrative of interpretation that shaped the formation of the literary canon. The panel organizers are especially interested in the ways in which publishers sought to distinguish their editions from their competitors’ through the inclusion of author portraits. These portraits were often based on existing (painted) portraits but were also frequently specifically designed for inclusion in editions of these authors’ works. The panel seeks to contextualize the economic and publishing-/branding-related aspects of book illustration, the production of printed portraits and the ways in which these portraits contributed to engendering writers’ multifarious types of authorship. It aims to embed the production and consumption of book illustrations, including author portraits, within the contexts of the commodification of print objects and the expanding eighteenth-century reading public. Diachronic studies of the illustrations of one and the same text are as welcome as discussions of elite (in the form of the furniture print) or cheap print visual renderings of literary texts and their relationship to illustrated series of literary works. The organizers are especially keen to receive proposals that trace the publishing of different editions of the same author’s work and the different author portraits that were commissioned for these editions. 300-word proposals for papers should be sent to Dr. Alise Jameson and Kwinten Van De Walle.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Adaptations: Jesuit Missions in the Eighteenth Century

Carolyn C. Guile, Dept. of Art and Art History, Colgate U., 13 Oak Dr., Hamilton, NY 13346; cguile@colgate.edu

Truly global in nature, the Jesuit order performed a key function in the propagation of the Catholic faith and ideas during the sixteenth through eighteenth centuries before its suppression in 1773. As 2014 marks the 200th anniversary of the re-establishment of the Order, this timely panel invites contributions from scholars in all disciplines who are interested in Jesuit activity within or beyond Europe proper during the eighteenth century. Possible topics might include the relationship between visual representation and cultural transfer; rhetorical forms and foreign reception; the theater as a vehicle for conversion; the transmission, use, and representation of the Spiritual Exercises; Jesuit arts and architectures; issues of the “universal” and the “local”; scientific study and natural history; the dissemination of printed images and texts; native encounters and cultural adaptation; experiments gone wrong; martyrdom and murder; and suppression. Taken as a whole, the panel will explore the challenges and opportunities that cultural contact and exchange forced upon the Order, so as to understand the tensions among issues of doctrine, uniformity of message, toleration, and the realities or requirements of adaptation.

◊  ◊  ◊  ◊  ◊

Note (added 9 August 2014) — The original version of this posting unfortunately omitted Carolyn Guile’s panel on Jesuit Missions.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s