2007

Shakespeare's Church Crumbling

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 18.0007  Friday, 5 January 2007

From: 		John Webb <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Friday, 5 Jan 2007 15:10:01 -0000
Subject: 18.0002 Shakespeare's Church Crumbling
Comment: 	Re: SHK 18.0002 Shakespeare's Church Crumbling

There's also a very controversial plan to build a new bridge over the 
Avon. Many claim that the new bridge is unnecessary, and will ruin the 
view of Holy Trinity Church.

The amount of cash earmarked for the "useless" bridge is 


Price of Academic Journals

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 18.0006  Thursday, 4 January 2007

[1] 	From: 	Donald Bloom <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
	Date: 	Wednesday, 3 Jan 2007 14:01:24 -0600
	Subj: 	RE: SHK 18.0004 Price of Academic Journals

[2] 	From: 	Norman D. Hinton <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
	Date: 	Wednesday, 03 Jan 2007 14:22:17 -0600
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 18.0004 Price of Academic Journals

[3] 	From: 	Marcia Eppich-Harris <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
	Date: 	Wednesday, 03 Jan 2007 16:04:50 -0800
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 18.0004 Price of Academic Journals

[4] 	From: 	Harry Connors <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
	Date: 	Thursday, 04 Jan 2007 02:06:04 +0000
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 18.0004 Price of Academic Journals


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Donald Bloom <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Wednesday, 3 Jan 2007 14:01:24 -0600
Subject: 18.0004 Price of Academic Journals
Comment: 	RE: SHK 18.0004 Price of Academic Journals

Julia Griffin, justifying English faculty for forcing students to buy 
new anthologies because the old ones are out of print, writes, "If he 
[Connor] has a solution to the problem, other than giving up on 
anthologies altogether, I would be delighted to hear it."

I, in fact, gave up on anthologies, especially the big, fat ones like 
the Nortons, some time ago. For Brit Lit Survey, I have downloaded 
everything I use except the longest works, and done my own editing and 
glossing. Many of the longer works (Shakespeare in Part I, Dickens in 
Part II, et al.) exist in very inexpensive bound volumes, and these I do 
require.

20th century material covered by copyright is another matter, so I don't 
include as much after "The Waste Land" as I might.

Cheers,
don

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Norman D. Hinton <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Wednesday, 03 Jan 2007 14:22:17 -0600
Subject: 18.0004 Price of Academic Journals
Comment: 	Re: SHK 18.0004 Price of Academic Journals

 >For a peer-reviewed journal (the only ones worth discussing),
 >do the members of the editorial board and the article reviewers
 >get some kind of stipend? If so, how much?

I have been a "peer reviewer" for scholarly journals in my field for 
many years (I have a journal article on my desk right now to review)  -- 
I have never received a single penny in payment -- not even a free copy 
of the journal. It's part of one's professional duty.

Nor do I know any editors of such journals who are paid -- in some 
cases, their Universities give them a slightly reduced teaching load in 
compensation.  But not every journal editor is so lucky.

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Marcia Eppich-Harris <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Wednesday, 03 Jan 2007 16:04:50 -0800
Subject: 18.0004 Price of Academic Journals
Comment: 	Re: SHK 18.0004 Price of Academic Journals

I worked for a scholarly journal for three years as the editorial 
assistant, and I can give a little insight to how much it costs to run a 
scholarly journal, but not a complete picture. The journal had a 
subscription base of about 700. Of that, only about 10% were individuals 
and the rest were institutions. The journal is a quarterly, and the 
subscription rate is 25 dollars for individuals, 35 for institutions, 
and 40 for international subscriptions. So the claim that journals are 
charging substantially higher prices to institutions isn't always the 
case-it wasn't for us, anyway, unless you consider 10 dollar's 
difference to be substantial.

The journal is funded in part by my university and had a staff of three 
people: the editor, editorial assistant, and a student assistant. We 
also had volunteer readers from across the university. I don't know what 
compensation the editor received for his job, but I can tell you that I 
was given a full tuition assistantship with a stipend of 12,000 dollars. 
The student assistant was paid 6.50 an hour and worked about 10 hours a 
week.  The cost of printing the journal varied depending on its length. 
We occasionally did special issues that ran much longer than the usual 
4-article issue. The shorter issues were about 4000 dollars to print, 
and the longer ones were about 5000. Mailing cost a couple hundred 
dollars per quarter.

If you average the subscription rate at about 35 dollars, that would 
make the subscription "profit" about 24500 dollars, which would only 
just cover the printing cost of the journal-not the editor's salary, the 
editorial assistant, or the student assistant, nor supplies, etc. 
However, the journal survives through the grants of the university and 
the very frugal budgeting of the editor. There are a lot of hidden costs 
in this sort of thing too- buying computers (needed to be updated at 
least every five years or sooner), software, artwork subsidy, and cost 
of production, which we were able to streamline by formatting the 
journal ourselves in Quark Express, but for years, that cost was heavy 
because we had to pay the Public Relations graphics department to do it 
for us. Anyway, with all the extra expenses, etc, I would guess 
conservatively that the budget for even a smallish journal like the one 
I worked for would be about 40-50 thousand dollars a year, and that 
isn't making any profit. The scholars who contribute receive 2 
complimentary copies of the journal in which their work appears, and I 
think that's a pretty standard commission.

As for me, I very much enjoyed working for the journal. I was always 
reading something new and insightful about literature, even if it wasn't 
always about Shakespeare-though the editor actually had a Shakespearean 
bias while I worked there because he knew I liked reading those articles 
more than any others. For young scholars like myself, the scholarly 
journals are a very important way to read new, cutting edge material and 
help our own careers along too. I, personally, think the benefit 
outweighs the cost.

Best,
Marcia Eppich-Harris

[4]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Harry Connors <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Thursday, 04 Jan 2007 02:06:04 +0000
Subject: 18.0004 Price of Academic Journals
Comment: 	Re: SHK 18.0004 Price of Academic Journals

Whack a hornets' nest with a stick, and I ought to expect a reaction. 
I'll try to deal with a few of the comments.

I ought to be a good test case for the theory that those old texts are 
valuable. You see, I kept them. Not from the beginning, as a freshman I 
only kept texts in my major (which was not English), but by the end of 
my sophomore year I kept every text right through grad school. I bought 
good used texts when I could, but I didn't sell. So, out of all those 
texts that are still in my library, how many do I actually use--TWO! One 
is a text in the sub-discipline of my professional practice. It's out of 
date but has a few things that newer texts don't have. The point here is 
that the texts and books I use professionally aren't the ones I bought 
as a student. I could use them, I still have them, but they are badly 
out of date.

The other text I use is Shakespeare: The Complete Works edited by G.B. 
Harrison. My edition dates from 1968. It's old and beaten up, but it's 
an old friend. I bought it for an undergraduate upper division 
"Shakespeare" class. You might think this is an argument for keeping old 
texts, but it isn't. If I didn't have the Harrison, I'd buy something 
else with a sturdier binding.

Has the canon changed? A Funeral Elegy has come and gone. Debates over 
whether plays such as Two Noble Kinsmen, Edward II, or Edmund Ironside 
should be included in the canon are endless. But, if you are teaching a 
class such as the one I bought the Harrison for, would you really teach 
those plays? Maybe you don't want to teach the warhorses your students 
were taught in high school, but that leaves a lot of Shakespeare's best 
to teach. Now, if you are teaching a graduate seminar on Two Noble 
Kinsmen, fine, but are you going to make a complete works your text? 
Shakespeare's text hasn't changed and, while editors and funeral elegies 
come and go, you could still use that old Harrison text to teach the 
class I purchased it for. A good professor can add supplemental material 
if it is felt that a subject isn't covered in the old text. No, I'm not 
suggesting use of a 40 year old text (really, closer to 60). But, is a 1 
year old text all that better than a 5 or 10 year old text?

To paraphrase Everett Dirksen, a $100 here, a $100 there, pretty soon it 
adds up to real money. For some of your students $100 isn't a big deal. 
Others may miss a meal or two for a book. I was careful to note that not 
all professors are unmindful of the costs of books to their students. 
But, I also think some may pay lip service to holding down costs.

Are the textbook publishers truly not the same as the publishers of 
for-profit journals, or are they all subsidiaries of Tribune Corp?

I think Ms Griffin's response was the best. The publishers who bring out 
new editions to force turnover in textbook sales aren't going to keep 
old editions available. But, how different, in what matters, is the 
latest Norton from the Norton of 5 years ago? Would it be possible to 
permit students to use either? I ask this as a question. I don't know.

Harry Connors

_______________________________________________________________
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net>

DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the 
opinions expressed on it are the sole property of the poster, and the 
editor assumes no responsibility for them.

Price of Academic Journals

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 18.0004  Wednesday, 3 January 2007

[1] 	From: 	Norman D. Hinton <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
	Date: 	Saturday, 30 Dec 2006 13:47:24 -0600
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 17.1109 Price of Academic Journals

[2] 	From: 	Norman D. Hinton <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
	Date: 	Saturday, 30 Dec 2006 13:48:25 -0600
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 17.1109 Price of Academic Journals

[3] 	From: 	Shannon Miller <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
	Date: 	Saturday, 30 Dec 2006 15:46:15 -0500
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 17.1109 Price of Academic Journals

[4] 	From: 	Donald Bloom <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
	Date: 	Tuesday, 2 Jan 2007 10:25:54 -0600
	Subj: 	RE: SHK 17.1109 Price of Academic Journals

[5] 	From: 	Julia Griffin <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
	Date: 	Tuesday, 02 Jan 2007 16:57:09 -0500
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 17.1109 Price of Academic Journals


[1]-----------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Norman D. Hinton <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Saturday, 30 Dec 2006 13:47:24 -0600
Subject: 17.1109 Price of Academic Journals
Comment: 	Re: SHK 17.1109 Price of Academic Journals

On this topic, one ought to note the disgusting practice of charging 
academic libraries more (often much more) for the journals than members 
of the associations or individual subscribers are charged.  This does 
not encourage making the journals available to people who cannot afford 
the membership or subscription fees.

I strongly advocate getting scholarly journals printed at the lowest 
possible cost.

[2]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Norman D. Hinton <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Saturday, 30 Dec 2006 13:48:25 -0600
Subject: 17.1109 Price of Academic Journals
Comment: 	Re: SHK 17.1109 Price of Academic Journals

 >Tell the textbook publishers "No!" They're the same ones
 >who publish the journals you complain of.

Rarely the case.

[3]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Shannon Miller <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Saturday, 30 Dec 2006 15:46:15 -0500
Subject: 17.1109 Price of Academic Journals
Comment: 	Re: SHK 17.1109 Price of Academic Journals

There will undoubtedly be many responses to Mr. Connors' comment on 
faculty as creating the problem of rising journal costs: I will focus on 
two points here.  First, let me respond to the remark about textbooks. 
Most, in fact almost all, of the faculty that I know are incredibly 
conscientious about the cost of books for their courses:  I try to keep 
the costs to my students comfortably below $100 for any course.  Since 
as an undergrad between 1981 to 1985 I budgeted $75-$100 per class, this 
seems a very reasonable amount.  And since tuition rates can make an 
individual course "cost" anywhere from $1,500 per class to almost 4K, 
$100 (and even a substantially larger amount paid for books) is a tiny 
fraction of the cost.  As to new editions of textbooks, there is reason 
we don't want to be using the same text of, say, the Norton Anthology 
from 1985:  the canon and access to that canon has been fundamentally 
changed, and we need to recognize this in our classes.  And personally, 
I think students should keep their books as a marker of what they have 
learned.  Worrying about the resale value of the very material that 
makes the course worth anything is truly letting the tail wag the dog: 
my students will refuse to write in the book so they get back more 
money, with the result that they know the material less well and do 
badly in the course.

Further, there seems to be no recognition in Mr. Connors' statement that 
faculty, who may spend many months on producing articles to expand the 
field and introduce new ideas, get no financial recompense for producing 
articles in scholarly journals.  Our labor is free in this equation 
because we care more about the circulation of ideas than we do about 
personal profit.  Are there other, more indirect, rewards?  Depends on 
the scholar and that scholar's institution.  But if there is a problem 
with the "cost" of journals, it is not because faculty are profiting 
directly from this transaction.

Shannon Miller

[4]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Donald Bloom <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Tuesday, 2 Jan 2007 10:25:54 -0600
Subject: 17.1109 Price of Academic Journals
Comment: 	RE: SHK 17.1109 Price of Academic Journals

Aspects of this issue puzzle me, so I am wondering if I could get some 
answers.

What are the names of the for-profit journals published by commercial 
publishing houses?

Do they have any relevance to English literary studies or the humanities 
generally? (Are any of our journals "profitable"?)

What kind of expenses do any scholarly journals have beyond those 
necessary for printed publication -- that is, beyond type-setting and 
layout, paper, ink and press time, and distribution costs?

Presumably you have to pay an editor and his or her secretary. For a 
peer-reviewed journal (the only ones worth discussing), do the members 
of the editorial board and the article reviewers get some kind of 
stipend? If so, how much? What is the bottom-line on costs for a 
first-rate journal?

We then can ask how these expenses are to be covered. I know that many 
journals are subsidized by universities, and I also know that there is 
constant pressure to save money by dropping these subsidies. If the 
costs could be reduced significantly so would the pressure- presumably.

It might also be possible to get foundation grants-perhaps ones so 
sizable that they could permanently fund the journal-especially if the 
costs did not include all those printing expenses.

Does anybody know what the figures are? Such knowledge might 
significantly speed the grass-roots movement that Gabriel speaks of.

Cheers,
don

[5]-------------------------------------------------------------
From: 		Julia Griffin <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Tuesday, 02 Jan 2007 16:57:09 -0500
Subject: 17.1109 Price of Academic Journals
Comment: 	Re: SHK 17.1109 Price of Academic Journals

In reply to Mr. Connors: the reason why university professors "insist on 
the latest editions" is that they are, within about a year, the only 
ones readily available for mass purchase.  I would love to use the same 
edition of (say) the Norton Anthology of English Literature that I used 
four years ago; it is no longer in print.  I am therefore using the 
latest edition - not, as Mr. Connors implies, out of some imperious and 
irresponsible caprice, but because that is now all there is.  If he has 
a solution to the problem, other than giving up on anthologies 
altogether, I would be delighted to hear it.

Julia Griffin


_______________________________________________________________
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net>

DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the 
opinions expressed on it are the sole property of the poster, and the 
editor assumes no responsibility for them.

Suffering Fools

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 18.0005  Thursday, 4 January 2007

From: 		Michael P Jensen <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Wednesday, 3 Jan 2007 15:27:13 -0800
Subject: 	Suffering Fools

On page 11 of the new book *Shakespeares After Shakespeare: An 
Encyclopedia of the Bard in Mass Media and Popular Culture,* editor 
Richard Burt has reproduced a New Yorker cartoon with the caption, "Mr. 
Tilson will suffer you gladly now."

Surely this references II Corinthians 11, not Shakespeare. I have tried 
to think of something in Shakespeare to justify including it, but it 
looks like a mistake. PLEASE correct me. I want to be wrong about this.

All the best,
Mike Jensen

_______________________________________________________________
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net>

DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the 
opinions expressed on it are the sole property of the poster, and the 
editor assumes no responsibility for them.

King Lear Anniversary

The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 18.0003  Wednesday, 3 January 2007

From: 		Stacy Keach <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.>
Date: 		Saturday, 30 Dec 2006 19:48:02 EST
Subject: 17.1108 King Lear Anniversary
Comment: 	Re: SHK 17.1108 King Lear Anniversary

I deeply appreciated Al Margary's providing Louise Jury's reflections on 
King Lear from The Independent, having just played the role myself at 
Chicago's Goodman Theatre under the direction of Robert Falls.  History 
has often overlooked the fact that the text of Lear has survived many 
permutations and interpretations, and it is interesting to note that the 
play is currently enjoying a plethora of productions with Kevin Kline, 
Ian McKellan, and Brian Bedford all tackling the play in forthcoming 
productions and in relatively the same time frame of the ensuing 
theatrical season. It may be of further interest that our production in 
Chicago was preceded in Boston and New York by the wonderful actor, 
Alvin Epstein, who tackled the role at age 80. My own personal 
experience in playing the part supports Jury's reference to Ian Holm's 
notion that it "requires great  stamina" both physically, technically, 
and emotionally, and it seems that  the circumstances of the world's 
current political climate are lending themselves to a multitude of 
interesting and provocative interpretations. Thank you, Ms. Jury, for 
enlisting and renewing our interest in the "Year of Lear", certainly one 
of the milestones of the Shakespearean canon and of a classical actor's 
career.

Stacy Keach

_______________________________________________________________
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook, This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net>

DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the 
opinions expressed on it are the sole property of the poster, and the 
editor assumes no responsibility for them.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Search

Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.