[Vwoolf] Woolf conferences - not to the point

[Stuart N. Clarke]

Of course, I agree with Susan (below).

However, here are some thoughts . . .

The first VW conference I ever attended was a 1-day one at the U of London.
I remember an academic saying to me that it was very good but that she
didn't feel *cherished* (as we stood about in a corridor).  Odd, but
correct.  Thorough administrative preparation is vital.  I remember an
academic giving a paper where there weren't enough handouts - "But I *asked*
for enough to be produced."  And I remember Pierre-Eric Villeneuve - où est
le Pierre d'antan? - showing me up in front of everyone by telling me I was
wrong, when I was in fact right - luckily just a small chip on the shoulder
remains - où sont les pierres d'antan, je me demande.

I remember an Anglo-French one-day conference, where of course the British
did close readings of the text and the French did theory.  One paper was so
obscurely theoretical that only (French) people in that academic area could
understand it.

As for the International Conferences, what are they *for*?  What is the
mission statement?  (Sorry.)

As an outsider - a non-academic - they're not (presumably) intended for me.
Where are the common readers?  They may be welcome, but they're not there.
AnneMarie Bantzinger often goes, but generally, if you're not giving a
paper, you don't go.

I remember talk about conferences in general: that they were a way perhaps
of getting a(nother) job.  I'm not aware of that at Woolf conferences.
There's socialising with like-minded people, of course.

>From an academic POV, I suppose conferences help your CV: tick, tick, tick.
>From a(n under)graduate POV, it helps the CV and provides training in
presentation.

I remember another 1-day conference, where one of the papers was on Woolf
and sex.  I can't remember why it was dreadful (even if you don't agree with
what's being said, sex as a topic you would expect to be entertaining) -
apart from anything else, I think she gabbled; probably her talk was too
long and she couldn't bear to cut it down.  Which reminds me of that
excellent doc. by Beth Daugherty on presentation at conferences.
Unfortunately, you can take a horse to water . . .

Again for an outsider, what's the point of being allocated to a room with 3
others on slightly similar topics and each talking for 15-20 mins to a room
of 15-20 people?  You'd want to be bloody sure that that paper was going to 
be published somewhere.

Then there is the question of quality.  Perhaps I've become old and
jaundiced, or perhaps I now know more, but the earlier conferences I
attended were more informative (for me - and I like facts, Mr Gradgrind)
than the later.  I take notes of info. that I can deal with.  When I get
home, I look up refs and index info.  I've done that less and less over the
years.

It is obvious that the higher the quality of the papers demanded, the fewer
of them.  The corollary is, it would seem, the fewer the papers the fewer
the attendees (see above).

Thus, I don't have answers, only questions.  I feel that Woolf's "Why?" has 
some relevance.  E.g., why shouldn't the papers be available in advance and 
the sessions discuss them?

Stuart


-----Original Message----- 
From: Susan E Wegener
Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2014 1:01 PM
To: vwoolf at lists.osu.edu
Subject: Re: [Vwoolf] Graduate students and Woolf conference

Hi Julie,

I have attended Woolf conferences since 2001, and have usually found that
the quality of papers depends upon good ideas and preparation, rather than
status.

Sincerely,

Susan Wegener


--
Susan Wegener
English Department
Purdue University
Heavilon Hall 207
swegener at purdue.edu