IMC Leeds, 2019
Wrapping up the IMC (International Medieval Congress), here at Leeds. All in all, things were fantastic. Although I didn't attend the Monday panels, mostly because of excessive registration fees and extra hotel charges, the Wednesday panels were highly productive and worthwhile.
In the first paper panel, Andrzej Wicher asked about how Christian LotR was. (Answer: very). William James Sherood, a grad student, gave a good talk on Tolkien's Romanticism from Keats via William Morris. My own talk was on methodology and the usefulness of a Strauss lens when studying Tolkien.
Alas, despite about 50-60 audience members, which incidentally meant that I fell drastically short of handouts, the Q&A ended somewhat early. Such things happen.
As for the following round table, it was me, Anahit Behrooz (a grad student, some of whose essays I'd seen elsewhere), and an independent scholar, Michael Flowers, whom I remember seeing present at the Tolkien Seminar 4-5 years ago. This was a much more lively affair. We each opened with 8-minute spiels about "new voices and new topics" in Tolkien scholarship, and our papers worked well with one another. Flowers gave a straight new biographical talk, Behrooz argued that Tolkien (despite some problematic aspects) was compatible with critical theory, and I argued that we find paradigms besides theory with which to approach Tolkien and fantasy literature in general.
Q&A was lively, and I enjoyed that there was some push-back against some of my own ideas. For example, I explained my ambivalence about using Queer Theory on Tolkien, as one prominent scholar recently did. Basically, this ambivalence is that thinking someone as privileged as Tolkien could be supported by Q. T. requires some intellectual acrobatics; if Tolkien counts as "queer," then who doesn't? Not sure if anyone was convinced, but such polite disagreements are always fruitful.
One other thing that amused me greatly. My wife was in attendance, and she happened to sit next to someone typing notes during the round table. When I gave my 8-minute spiel, she typed, "Seems bright." Once the Q&A opened up, however, she crossed that out and wrote, "Seems full of hot air, but google Strauss anyway." Now I'm fatally curious to discover (a) who it was, and (b) what I'd said to trigger that! Oh well -- can't win them all, I suppose.
In the first paper panel, Andrzej Wicher asked about how Christian LotR was. (Answer: very). William James Sherood, a grad student, gave a good talk on Tolkien's Romanticism from Keats via William Morris. My own talk was on methodology and the usefulness of a Strauss lens when studying Tolkien.
Alas, despite about 50-60 audience members, which incidentally meant that I fell drastically short of handouts, the Q&A ended somewhat early. Such things happen.
As for the following round table, it was me, Anahit Behrooz (a grad student, some of whose essays I'd seen elsewhere), and an independent scholar, Michael Flowers, whom I remember seeing present at the Tolkien Seminar 4-5 years ago. This was a much more lively affair. We each opened with 8-minute spiels about "new voices and new topics" in Tolkien scholarship, and our papers worked well with one another. Flowers gave a straight new biographical talk, Behrooz argued that Tolkien (despite some problematic aspects) was compatible with critical theory, and I argued that we find paradigms besides theory with which to approach Tolkien and fantasy literature in general.
Q&A was lively, and I enjoyed that there was some push-back against some of my own ideas. For example, I explained my ambivalence about using Queer Theory on Tolkien, as one prominent scholar recently did. Basically, this ambivalence is that thinking someone as privileged as Tolkien could be supported by Q. T. requires some intellectual acrobatics; if Tolkien counts as "queer," then who doesn't? Not sure if anyone was convinced, but such polite disagreements are always fruitful.
One other thing that amused me greatly. My wife was in attendance, and she happened to sit next to someone typing notes during the round table. When I gave my 8-minute spiel, she typed, "Seems bright." Once the Q&A opened up, however, she crossed that out and wrote, "Seems full of hot air, but google Strauss anyway." Now I'm fatally curious to discover (a) who it was, and (b) what I'd said to trigger that! Oh well -- can't win them all, I suppose.
Comments
Post a Comment