The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 21.0369 Friday, 10 September 2010
Date: September 1, 2010 5:40:24 PM EDT
Subject: Suggestions for Next Roundtable
Comment: SHK 21.0361 Suggestions for Next Roundtable
In the last round of SHAKSPER digests, I sent a digest with the two suggestions I have received
regarding possible topics for a third SHAKSPER Roundtable discussion:
The two suggestions I received were from Jeremy Fiebig and Richard Waugaman.
Fiebig suggested that he thought "it would be splendid to host a discussion on Shakespeare and
Access, particularly because it seemed to be such a feature of the ISC. Issues might involve the
role of the Internet and social media in Shakespeare Studies, etc."
Richard Waugaman noted that "We've neglected a vast source of Shakespeare's Psalm allusions, in the
Sternhold and Hopkins Whole Book of Psalms (WBP). The significant allusions to that translation
discovered in the past two years already outnumber those compiled by Shaheen."
These were the only two suggestions I have received, unless I overlooked them, and I have received
no comments on the suitability or desirability of these two.
I conceived of the idea for the SHAKSPER Roundtables as a way to raise, at the time, the level of
discourse on the list and to help to return the list to its founding emphasis on the interests of
the academic Shakespeare community.
In that same digest, I repeated my previous report that "the special issue of the journal STYLE that
came about from the collaboration between that journal and the last SHAKSPER Roundtable on
Shakespeare Intentions was undergoing its final proofing and would be ready in late October
In my essay for this special issue, I conclude with this paragraph:
What conclusions can I draw from this [the second Roundtable] experience? First, Roundtables
are a lot of work. Second, this one might never have occurred had there not been an interesting
thread on the subject that ran for approximately a month as an ordinary SHAKSPER discussion,
prompting John Knapp to bring up the possibility of collaboration between SHAKSPER and _Style_.
Third, the success of this project owes a great deal to the work of the intelligent, thoughtful
young scholar [Cary DiPietro] who agreed to guest moderate it and did so with noteworthy planning
and diplomatic moderating. And, finally, the exercise as productive as it was might never have come
about without the carrot of the collaboration with the print journal _Style_. This carrot may have
influenced the decision of those who volunteered to write leading essays for it and may also have
influenced the guest moderator to take on this daunting task. If I am correct about this final
point, I can conclude that until electronic projects such as this one carry the same respect in the
academy that a scholarly publication does, future Roundtables may be doomed never to come about.
Having retired on disability, I am no longer a part of the rhythms of the academic calendar and I
may not be remembering the pressures of the new semester that can be virtually all-consuming. Thus,
I may not be recognizing that perhaps the lack on interest in mentioning possible topics for a
future Roundtable discussion or on commenting on those that have been suggested could be
attributable to the pressures of a new school year. However, in light of my experiences with the
first two SHAKSPER Roundtables, I cannot overlook the possibility that academics have too many other
activities going on to want to spread themselves out even further by undertaking the work required
to participate fully in a time-consuming project like moderating or participating in an engaged
manner in an online Roundtable discussion that, at present, at least, would appear to be lacking in
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
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