For questions about the seminar or to have yourself added to the listserv, please contact:
For questions about this web site contact:
All sessions to be held on Mondays in the Lilly Library Lounge at 4 p.m.
This paper arises from my work on the papers of Samuel Hartlib (c.1600- 1662), a Polish-Prussian man of science who spent the majority of his adult life in exile in London. Hartlib was fascinated with HOW we learn. That fascination arose from a critique of established ways of learning that was radical and far-reaching. It led to an obsession with what I want to call 'technologies of learning'. These technologies were applied, of course, to the media of communicating knowledge, and in particular, printed books. He had interesting things to say about the organization of libraries and catalogues. But he was also interested in the internal layout of books as a technological phenomenon that was vital to the processes of human learning. Printed books, however, were not his only concern. He was also interested in the technologies of manuscript circulation, in ink, multiple copying, carbon-paper, and quills. This led him to the technologies of reading, including improved illumination and, of course, the vital question of the structure of language and its reform. The paper will be illustrated from the papers of Samuel Hartlib.
MARK GREENGRASS is Professor of Early-Modern History and Executive Director of the Humanities Research Institute at the University of Sheffield (U.K.). He has written extensively both on Early Modern France (France in the Age of Henry IV: The Struggle for Stability ; The French Reformation ) and on 16th and 17th-Century England, particularly on Samuel Hartlib and his circle. He was Director of the Hartlib Papers Project from 1988 onwards, which work culminated in a CD-Rom Edition of Hartlib's Papers put out by UMI in 1995, and has recently completed an on-line edition of John Foxe's Book of Martyrs (http://www.hrionline.ac.uk/foxe/); he is the author as well of an article on Hartlib in the Cambridge History of Book in Britain, Vol. IV. He is spending two weeks on the Bloomington Campus as a Fellow of the Institute for Advanced Study.
Donald Krummel is one of the nation's leading authorities on Early Modern Music Publishing and Printing and on the compilation of bibliographies in general. In this talk, however, he will survey the "totality of written records" (or at least since the time of Gutenberg), examining how book worlds differ (or are similar) across the globe (America, France, Germany, Russia, Latin America, Japan) and in different historical periods. This is a project that may well run counter to the cause of what cataloguers call Universal Bibliographical Control. He will be arguing, among other things, that the heart or center of specialized publishing worlds--for instance those of Music or Map printing--lies entirely outside the book trade, an assertion that runs counter to many of the talks members of the Seminar have heard heretofore.
DONALD KRUMMEL is Professor Emeritus in the School of Library and Information Science at the University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana. He is author of ENGLISH MUSIC PRINTING, 1553-1700 (1975; rpt. 1990), LITERATURE OF MUSIC BIBLIOGRAPHY: AN ACCOUNT OF THE WRITINGS ON THE HISTORY OF MUSIC PRINTING & PUBLISHING (1993), BIBLIOGRAPHIES: THEIR AIMS AND METHODS (1984), and numerous other books and articles.
In the early nineteenth century, a few publishing entrepreneurs decided the time was right to launch true mass media in America. Though these entrepreneurs were savvy businessmen, their enterprises were not commercial businesses; they were nonprofit religious publishing organizations. And they were remarkably successful, churning out millions of Bibles, tracts, religious books, and periodicals. In this talk, based upon his recent book, Faith in Reading: Religious Publishing and the Birth of Mass Media in America, 1790-1860, David Nord tells the story of those publishers and their readers. He will focus especially how the publishers expected readers to respond to the new religious mass media and on how readers actually did respond.
DAVID PAUL NORD is professor of journalism and adjunct professor of history at Indiana University and is also associate editor of the Journal of American History. He is the author of Communities of Journalism: A History of American Newspapers and Their Readers and is a co-editor of The Enduring Book: Publishing in Post-War America, the forthcoming fifth volume in the American Antiquarian Society's A History of the Book in America.
On November 5, 1709 the rabid high-church Tory Henry Sacheverell delivered an incendiary sermon, "The Perils of the False Brethren," that, when printed soon after, became one of the hottest-selling works of eighteenth-century England. Sales soon climbed to 100,000 copies, in a country with a voting populace of perhaps 250,000 people. The "False Brethren" of the title were Sacheverell's Whig opponents who had replaced the Catholic James II with Protestant William and Mary back in 1688 and thereafter, as an after-the-fact justification for such a change in sovereigns, promoted a doctrine of conditional or contractual submission on the part of the English people. Sacheverell's sermon both objected to the toleration the Whigs were offering to Protestant non-conformists and presented an alternative reading of the 1688 revolution. He argued that because James II had fled to France and thus abdicated before William and Mary assumed the throne, submission or resistance had actually not been an issue in 1688; what was required of the English people at that time and indeed at all times was complete and total obedience to whatever monarch happened to hold the throne at any particular time. He was thereby harking back to the doctrine of passive obedience which had applied in the time of divine-right monarchs of the earlier Stuart era.
This was taken to be treasonous talk, an affront to "Revolution principles," by the Whig administration, which brought charges of sedition against the Tory firebrand. In my talk I examine the paper war that resulted from Sacheverell's sermon and subsequent trial for the way it reveals a political world turned topsy-turvy: calls for "obedience" became instances of dangerous resistance, and panegyrics to "resistance" served as a show of loyalty to the now-reigning Queen Anne. Amid this confusion, pamphlets both for and against Sacheverell sought to establish a rubric for instructing the non-voting public how to interpret authentic obedience. Setting the exchange of pamphlets in the context of earlier paper wars, I shall provide examples of the way this appeal to public opinion sought to instruct women and the lower orders particularly. Of especial interest in this episode is the phenomenon of what I call the "hostile reprint," in which a work from an earlier era (in this case, from before 1688) is republished by one's opponent in order to show the author's inconsistencies and thereby to embarrass him.
JEFFREY GALBRAITH is completing his PhD in the English Department at Indiana University, writing a dissertation entitled "The Gender and Politics of Commitment: Exploring Opposition in Eighteenth-Century Literature." He has an MA in Creative Writing from Boston University, has published poems and reviews in various journals, and has delivered papers on Dryden, Swift, and playwright, novelist, and scandal-writer Delarivier Manley at meetings of the American Society for 18th-Century Studies, MMLA, and other conferences. He has been teaching, this year and last, as a Visiting Lecturer at Holy Cross in Worcester, Massachusetts.
In 1794, Philadelphia gained its first urban historian. It was, surely, about time. The city was not just a thriving seaport and commercial centre; it was also the site of the new United States federal government. Benjamin Davies's history reprised the city's demography, climate and institutions. It and celebrated the city's leading status in the business of print (Davies was himself a bookseller). And it reflected the sentimental project articulated during and especially after the war for independence: a regenerated society of sympathetic citizens. Whereas the new polity was reserved, for the most part, to independent white men, a new national society might include refining women, rehabilitated criminals and, as Davies would put it, the "rising generation of blacks."
But all was not rosy. In the decade of the 1790s, sensibility went broadcast. It turned up in the almanac, that popular form of print aimed at the shillings of ordinary folk as repositories of practical information and advice. It also became, as this paper argues, sharply controversialized and fragmented. Benjamin Davies' account offers a hint why: its calm and descriptive surface was interrupted by ranting asides against the "destructive spirits and ruinous policies" of the French. With the execution of Louis XVI, militarization and mass de-Christianization, initially enthusiastic American responses to the French revolution had bifurcated. Ruling Federalists were appalled; opposition Republicans and radical democrats defended the revolutionary dynamic. And sensibility was cut about in the political fray.
Scholars of Britain might recognise some of this from the British war of words: that writerly fight between conservatives like Edmund Burke and radicals like Thomas Paine and Mary Wollstonecraft. And they would be right. For the American debate was not just prompted by the rise of parties in the young nation; it was also shaped by the in-house battles of radical British emigres. The fate of sensibility in the young United States would be decided, in part, by that band of printers and advocates of _King Killing_ formed in the city of exile from reactionary Britain, including their best-known turncoat William Cobbett.
SARAH KNOTT is Assistant Professor of History at Indiana, having earlier earned a D.Phil at Oxford. She has edited, with Barbara Taylor, WOMEN, GENDER AND ENLIGHTENMENT (Palgrave, 2005), which volume includes her own essay on Enlightenment Medicine and Female Citizenry in Revolutionary America. Today's talk is part of a book-length study she is completing, SENSIBILITY IN REVOLUTIONARY AMERICA, for which she received a Mellon Postdoctoral Fellowship in the 2004-05 academic year.
This paper looks closely -- and distantly -- at a pair of campaign books reporting on the Third Mysore War, fought between the armies of the British East India Company and Tipu Sultan Fath Ali Khan. The engravings in these large-format books were among the first images available in Great Britain of the southern part of the subcontinent; the campaign books themselves were among the first of this genre, which became quite popular in the opening decades of the nineteenth century. What is striking about these images is how little they tell of the campaign, and the way they undermine the triumphal narrative offered in the accompanying text. Attending especially to the unsettling forms of distance in these images, and comparing them to later photographic documentation of warfare, we can re-assess our assumptions about the effects of visual documentation of war, especially war conducted at a distance.
MARY FAVRET is Associate Professor of English at Indiana University- Bloomington and author of ROMANTIC CORRESPONDENCE: WOMEN, POLITICS, AND THE FICTION OF LETTERS (Cambridge U. Press, 1993) and co-editor (with Nicola Watson) of a volume of essays, AT THE LIMITS OF ROMANTICISM: ESSAYS IN CULTURAL, FEMINIST, AND MATERIALIST CRITICISM (Indiana U. Press, 1994). She has the unusual distinction of having written extensively both on Jane Austen and on War in the Romantic Era, the connections between those two subjects (war and everyday life on the home front) being part of the focus of her present book project, THE GROUND OF WAR: BRITISH ROMANTICISM IN WARTIME.
Since 1992 I have been Classics editor of the Times Literary Supplement. This involves commissioning reviews and editing the submitted copy -- as well as a variety of other peripheral tasks (from choosing illustrations to occasional bits of 'setting' and headline writing). I also review regularly for the London Review of Books and other UK newspapers and magazines. This talk starts from reflections drawn from my own experience (as reviewed as well as reviewer): how fair is reviewing? what impact does it have on sales/reputation? are there structural, if not personal, biases in the reviewing trade? what makes a good review? But it proceeds to look briefly at some more historical questions: how has reviewing changed over the last 100 years (and where might it go next)?
MARY BEARD is Professor of Classics at the University of Cambridge. She has published extensively on a very wide variety of subjects, ranging from Roman religion to literacy in the ancient world to the Parthenon, using approaches that engage feminist theory, comparative mythology, and study of rituals. She is author or co-author of nine books, one of which, CLASSICS: A VERY SHORT INTRODUCTION (co-written with John Henderson) is now in its second edition and has been translated into Portuguese, Spanish, German, Polish, and Chinese. Her biography of her controversial Newnham College classicist predecessor, THE INVENTION OF JANE HARRISON (Harvard U. Press, 2000), has been justly described as "100-per-cent-proof pleasure, pure biographical ouzo."
The Hinman Collator represents one of the most important applications of technology to the study of literature ever made. Yet only a part of the story of its invention is widely known. The collator was developed in the late 1940s by the Shakespeare scholar Charlton Hinman, who used it to break new ground in the study of Shakespeare's text and of books and printing generally. By 1978, when the last machine was manufactured, collators could be found in libraries and other institutions (like the CIA) throughout the U.S. and in Europe and Canada. Though built for the study of printed texts and primarily used for the creation of critical editions of literary authors, the Hinman Collator has also been used for other projects where the close comparison of apparently identical images is required, everything from the study of illustrations to the examination of watermarks to the detection of forged banknotes. Beginning in the late 1960s, the Hinman has also played a small but important role in the theory wars and over the years has been associated with everything from cutting edge research and a scientific methodology to cold war paranoia and homophobia. This talk will address the known, unknown, and misunderstood aspects of the invention of the Hinman Collator. It will also examine the impact of the machine and attempt to place both its development and use in a wider theoretical, historical, and social context.
STEVEN E. SMITH is C. Clifford Wendler Professor and Director of the Cushing Memorial Library and Archives as well as Associate Dean for Advancement for the Texas A&M University Libraries. He is the author of ROY FULLER: A BIBLIOGRAPHY (Scolar, 1996) and editor of AMERICAN BOOK AND MAGAZINE ILLUSTRATORS TO 1920 (Gale, 1998). He is founder and director of the annual Book History at A&M Workshop, which provides students with hands-on experience in printing and its allied technologies (typecasting, bookbinding, paper-making, and illustration) prior to 1800. This talk builds upon his article on the Hinman Collator in STUDIES IN BIBLIOGRAPHY, 53 (2000), 129-62. IU's own Hinman Collator will also make an appearance at the session.
From the late seventeenth through the late nineteenth century, Chinese book culture was transformed by two developments: the geographical spread of publishing, once concentrated in the great cities of the eastern coast, to the hinterlands of the Qing empire; and the related social dissemination of texts downward to sectors of the population that had previously enjoyed little access to books. A case study of the Sibao publishing industry illustrates both of these developments. Despite their unfavorable location in an impoverished hinterland (in western Fujian province), the Sibao publisher-booksellers took advantage of the simplicity and flexibility of woodblock printing technology and the demographic boom of the Qing to build a vigorous book trade in popular texts, with distribution routes and markets in almost all the provinces of south China. For roughly two hundred and fifty years they published and sold cheap editions of textbooks, practical guides to daily life (medical manuals, ritual guides, and fortune-telling handbooks), and popular fiction in the administrative seats, market towns, and even peasant villages of the south. Drawing on field work and archival and library research, I describe the Sibao book trade and assess its place in late imperial book culture, focusing on the role Sibao publishing played in cultural integration and the spread of literacy in the nineteenth century.
CYNTHIA BROKAW is Associate Professor of History at The Ohio State University. She is author of THE LEDGERS OF MERIT AND DEMERIT: SOCIAL CHANGE AND THE MORAL ORDER IN LATE IMPERIAL CHINA (Princetion, 1991) and COMMERCE IN CULTURE: THE BOOK TRADE IN SOUTH CHINA 1663-1946 (In Press, Harvard University Asia Center), and co-editor, with Kai-wing Chow, of PRINTING AND BOOK CULTURE IN LATE IMPERIAL CHINA (U. of California Press, 2005). She was co-organizer of a 2004 conference at Ohio State entitled "From Woodblocks to the Internet: Chinese Publishing and Print Culture in Transition."
Sponsored by the Institute for Advanced Study and supported by a grant from the Mellon Foundation.