Kalamazoo 2019 Can Be #TheFutureWeWant

Medieval studies has become a site of tension as the field is one of the last to interrogate its approaches, methodologies, effects, and responsibilities. Over the last few years, with the rise of white supremacists across America and Europe, medieval scholars have ramped up efforts that were already underway to bring a more nuanced and inclusive approach to the study of the Middle Ages.

My purpose here is not to recap the developments and debates. (You can read more about it here, here, here, here, and here. And plenty others.)

My purpose is instead to highlight the positive, as Jeffrey Cohen suggested in this blog post: “May I suggest that we give our attention instead to those who deserve our regard? Numerous alternative versions of the field are already out there: promote the hell out of them. Proclaim the future you want. Amplify the work and the voices you stand behind.”

One of the results of this heightened awareness in medieval studies is that certain time-honored practices and institutions come under scrutiny. (Because “this is how things have always been done” is not a good reason to continue doing it that way.)

Most noticeably in the recent past, the International Medieval Congress at Kalamazoo has come under scrutiny. A number of medievalists of color (and others) have decided not to attend Kalamazoo 2019 as a result (see links above for some statements about this). As of now, I still plan to attend. I have tentative faith that the organizers’ promise to create more transparency and to incorporate a broader range of voices in the selection process is not an empty one. While Kzoo 2019 may not immediately address all the problems, I hope that the committee will be working to fix the problems by Kzoo 2020. I will, however, constantly re-evaluate my decision with each development between now and May 2019. It’s a long time from now until then, and many things could happen.

But as we (rightfully) call out various aspects of our field and community that need repairing, it’s easy to lose sight of how much amazing work is being done in the opposite direction – how much of medieval scholarship is devoted to fostering a present that is inclusive of all races, genders, sexualities, abilities, etc.

So here’s my small attempt to contribute to the awareness of our collective awesomeness in the face of a rising tide of racism and white supremacy: a collected list of sessions at the upcoming conference in Kalamazoo 2019 that do this kind of forward-thinking work.

This is not to argue that Kalamazoo 2019 will be #TheFutureWeWant, but that it CAN be – with continued and strenuous effort on all our parts. In the grand scheme of things (hundreds of panels) this list is a drop in the bucket. Still, it’s useful to highlight these panels. I also want to stress that you can submit a forward-thinking paper to any panel, regardless of whether the cfp actively solicits that approach or not.

Some of these panels overtly address racism, white supremacy, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, etc., while some incorporate or make space for those approaches without overtly addressing them. Some CFPs don’t address contemporary issues directly, but they do hint at the possibility (these may be generous readings on my part, but I’m inclined to see the potential for now).

Many of these panels (including the one I’m organizing!) don’t directly explain how and why their approaches are helpful to combating racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, etc. But I do think they are potential spaces for discussions that will help theorize and analyze the way we look at medieval texts and topics, and therefore affect how our scholarship is positioned and deployed. And just because the panels aren’t direct doesn’t mean the papers in that session won’t be!

I am including all of them because I want to highlight how even those of us not on the “front lines” can (and must) be conscious of how our scholarship affects the overall picture.

(Note: In no way should this list be construed as absolute approval of any panel on my part. I could not possibly evaluate in depth each and every one of these, and I’m certainly not qualified to do so! Some of these assertions of inclusivity may not play out in the final line-up of papers, either. Use your judgement as you read this list, and please do comment if you disagree!)

Let me know if I missed any panels that should be included on this list! (I used UPenn’s cfp site, Facebook, a few email lists I subscribe to, and some Google searches to find these. I obviously missed at least some, and look forward to discovering more!)

(Click through to each for the full CFP. Below are excerpts from each that have a stable link, and full CFPs for any I accessed via an email and therefore don’t have a stable link for.)

I’ll begin with a CFP that includes a sharp critique of the field and of Kalamazoo: “Bryan and I can’t ignore the fact that two white men were given more space to talk about diversity than a group that is explicitly composed of scholars of color. We’re disappointed and more than a little bewildered. Considering that the ICMS organizing committee foregoes the kind of transparency that is standard in academic conferences generally, we can only speculate as to their reasons.”

  • Intersectional Medievalisms I (Creators of Color) &II (Queering the Medieval) “The close ties between medieval revivalism and the construction of cultural identities have long been recognized. The appropriation of the medieval past by white supremacist and nationalist groups has especially attracted comment over the past two years, and many scholars of medieval studies have traced those appropriations and highlighted the myths and misconceptions upon which they are built. The association of medievalism with the construction of normative (white, heterosexual, cisgender, Christian) identity has come to be so strong that it is often assumed that those who fall outside such identity groups would (or even should) have little or no interest in the Middle Ages. That this belief, which can troublingly be found in in the scholarly community just as much as the general public, is patently false could readily be seen at The Metropolitan Museum of Art’s 2018 “Heavenly Bodies” Gala. But similar to the invocation of the medieval past by such artists as Kehinde Wiley and Ron Athey, the medievalism of the Met Gala was treated somewhat superficially, with more concern for the glamor of the event than the complex coding of the fashion and its wearers. These sessions will consider the important, if often unmentioned, intersectional practice of medievalism in contemporary culture through papers and discussion about the use of medieval motifs and themes in contemporary works in any media by writers, performers, musicians, and artists of color and by queer and trans-identifying creators. As such, these sessions seek to be a first step towards a fuller consideration of medievalisms that range outside the customary assumptions about to whom the Middle Ages presents a usable past.”
  • Messy Bodies: An Interdisciplinary Approach to the Body in Pre-Modern Culture “Bodies resist categorization, they push against their own boundaries, they complicate our understanding of medieval and Renaissance subjectivity and individuality; ultimately, they show how we—modern scholars—still need to consider what constitutes the often radicalized or gendered body. They remind us that no “body” may be taken as a given, requiring (even while confounding) construction in discourse, images, and other media. “
  • The Medieval “Canon” in the Early British Literature Survey (A Roundtable) “Specifically, we welcome presentations that examine texts situated outside of the traditional/publisher-sanctioned medieval canon, the ways in which so-called non-canonical texts can be incorporated into the time period and the course, and how instructors address aspects of canonicity within the early survey.”
  • Dysphoric Pedagogies: Teaching About Transgender and Intersex in the Middle Ages: Students have long seemed curious about the non-binary and non-cisgender lives that appear in courses on pre-modern periods. This panel will offer a range of pedagogy techniques, lesson plans, assignments, reading lists, and anecdotes for those interested in enhancing how they teach about transgender and intersex in the Middle Ages. The concept of “Dysphoric Pedagogies” is drawn from the DSM-5 diagnostic language that describes the experience where one’s identified or expressed gender conflicts with the gender assigned by society. Scholars will share their experiences teaching dysphoria within the art, history, and literature in an era before the DSM-5 and its various diagnoses, or the coinage of the words “transgender” or “intersex.”  How have these moments of gender diversity and conflict provoked conversations about self and society, expression and audience, nature and nurture, gender norms and non-conformity, past and present? Send abstracts, Participant Information Form, and other inquiries to Gabrielle M.W. Bychowski (Gabrielle.Bychowski@case.edu).
  • The Middle Ages: What Does it Have to Do with Me? What does medieval art, culture, and history have to do with my life; what is the point of knowing this stuff? Immersed in the study of the Middle Ages as we are, we may lose sight of the fact that for many people the material to which we are passionately devoted holds little to no interest. It is our hope that this roundtable discussion can produce some strategies for countering this disengagement. As we consider how to expand access to and engagement with the field, we invite consideration of the roles identity can play in both academic and popular engagement with Medieval Studies. From its antiquarian origins to today, the field has been shaped by nationalist identities, impulses, and agendas. In more recent decades, scholarly attention to gender, racial, ethnic, religious, and sexual identities has expanded and re-shaped the field and created opportunities for multiple identifications with the past. We also wish to question this paradigm: must engagement be structured by identity? We welcome contributions treating all aspects of fostering access to and engagement with Medieval Studies both in the classroom and beyond. This includes consideration of the way we as scholars talk about Medieval Studies—where our voices are heard and what we can be heard to say. With humanities fields under constant threat, we may also wish to consider the various publics with whom we might profitably engage. Beyond undergraduate students are the parents, administrators, and legislators whose voices sway what does and does not get taught at colleges and universities; there are also the primary and secondary school students who may enter our classrooms someday in the future. A discussion of public engagement is also an opportunity to reconsider the way we conceive of our field. Ongoing efforts to decolonize Medieval Studies are essential to the mission of making the field accessible to a more diverse public. This includes engaging colleagues to recognize the need for change as well as the need to support medievalists marginalized by race, LGBTQ identity, or employment status. Topics for consideration may include but not be limited to: Engaging students; Engaging the public beyond the classroom; Medieval Studies and modern identities; Medieval Studies in the neoliberal academy; Promoting access to Medieval Studies; Role of public scholarship within the academy. Please submit abstracts of 300 words by September 15, 2018 to Rachel Dressler (dressler@albany.edu) and Maeve Doyle (DOYLEMAE@EASTERNCT.EDU).
  • Imperialism and Colonialism in the Late Middle Ages “Thus, an Empire-focused global history should take into account the origin, development and downfall of the diverse Empires that developed during the traditional time frame of the Middle Ages, not only in Europe, but also in the Middle and Far East, Northern and Sub-Saharan Africa. This session will receive papers by scholars who study Empire-building states with a focus on global history and multiculturalism in any of the aforementioned geographical locations, especially within the traditional time limits of the Late Middle Ages (1250-1500), but we can be flexible. No preference will be given to any particular geographical area, and we will try to accommodate a diversity of topics in the session.”
  • Toxic Masculinities: Creating, Enforcing, and Distorting Ideas of Manliness in the Middle Ages “MEARCSTAPA and Société Rencesvals, American-Canadian Branch seek to examine constructions of masculinity in the medieval world that destroys its subject, where it glorifies rape or violence as a means of restoration, or where, in other ways, it proves harmful to those caught in its restrictive ideologies.”
  • Critical Approaches to Medieval Men and Masculinities “This panel invites papers which contribute to and extend scholarship on medieval men and masculinities, particularly those which explore queer and intersectional masculinities. We aim to build upon critical work in this area, in particular developing scholarly knowledge of marginalised men and masculinities. “
  • Finding The Women in the Et Cetera: Doing Women’s History with Medieval Documents and Modern Archives “This panel will create a space for historians to reflect on what it means to do women’s history with tools and in spaces that were designed to privilege men and their voices, and to make visible the accreted layers of assumptions surrounding archival materials and the ways medieval women are present within them. We would like to further contribute to the ongoing scholarly conversation about archival theory by considering how the construction and use of archives is a gendered affair, and how that specifically affects the practice of medieval women’s history.”
  • Nineteenth- Century Medievalism(s) “The session, then, aims to explore this distinction through presentations that examine how writers in the nineteenth century both research and uncover the Middle Ages as well as creatively imagine and reimagine it. The theoretical notion of presentism—which argues (sometimes contentiously) that the past is not contaminated or cheapened by the present but is rather a time that interacts with the present and exists in the present—offers rich insights into the relevance of and continued interest in the Middle Ages today by highlighting progressive, nostalgic, and nonlinear views of history.”
  • Language and Boundaries in the Brut “We welcome papers that explore ways in which language both establishes and transgresses boundaries in the Brut texts—how language differentiates different national groups in the Brut, for instance, and how it is shown as bridging boundaries, through translation and through establishment of shared identities through shared language. The session is further interested in proposals that examine how language may be used to transgress boundaries of acceptable conduct and undermine established order, as in narratives of treachery and deceit.”
  • Girls to Women, Boys to Men: Gender in Medieval Education and Socialization “In addition, the scholarship on the socialization of children rarely — if ever — addresses queer gender identities, nor does it often directly address the formations of gender identities, gender expressions, or gender roles. This panel therefore aims to expand the discussion through papers about children and childhood, gender, socialization, and education…. What ideologies and structures played a role in the ways girls were trained or taught? What were the circumstances under which those ideologies differed (region, class, etc)? Was there space for queer gender identities and/or expressions in lived reality or in texts? How do texts reinforce or defy the dominant models of feminine training and socialization?”
  • Rhetoric of Resistance “Collectively, the session and its participants will consider how outlaw rhetoric comments upon the justice system and its representatives, thereby formulating a medieval rhetoric of resistance.”
  • Early Medieval Childhood, Parenting, and Family Structures “This panel welcomes papers that discuss parents, children, and families in early medieval England from any angle, but which might respond to one or several of the following questions. How did Anglo-Saxon writers imagine reproductive technologies and family structures beyond the constraints of heterosexuality and the nuclear family? How did they depict alternative forms of parenting, such as fosterage, child oblation, or cross-species adoption? How do genealogical trees describe the relationship between humankind and nature? How do representations of children speak to broader philosophical or theological investigations of human vulnerability and productivity?”
  • Translating Back: Vernacular Sources and Prestige-Language Adaptations “If theories of translation often seem to subscribe implicitly to King Alfred’s philosophy that vernacular translation ensures continued possession (and perhaps even a kind of democratization) of knowledge, does translating “upstream” restrict knowledge, or does it grant works a broader readership?”
  • Early Medieval Education “This panel welcomes scholarship from across medieval studies disciplines and geographical foci. It aims to engage global, theoretical, and material methodologies, to discover both broad and localized instances and impacts of early medieval education.”
  • Returning and Not Returning from War: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Loss of Self and Others in Medieval Depictions of Conflict “This panel seeks papers that apply approaches from psychology, trauma studies, medicine, hagiography, and any other relevant fields to analyze the aftereffects of war on knights’ minds and bodies in medieval narratives.”
  • More Fuss about the Body: New Medievalists’ Perspectives “We seek papers that deal with personhood, identity, and the material body, updating histories of the body through areas of study that have grown in popularity since the mid-1990s, including disability studies, trans studies, queer theory, postcolonial studies, posthumanism, ecocriticism, animal studies, and the global Middle Ages, along with new developments in feminist and critical race theory.”
  • Scribal Cultures Across Eurasia “This session will be an extension of the 2018-2019 programming at Princeton on this topic, which is part of an ongoing Princeton initiative seeking to connect not only divergent parts of medieval worlds but also this initiative with similar interests and projects at other research institutions and by other scholars. The Princeton medieval studies community is deeply committed to inclusivity. Graduate students, contingent faculty, early-career medievalists, women, persons with disabilities, members of the LGBTQ+ community, and people of color are strongly encouraged to apply.”
  • Byzantine and Medieval Slavic Theological Aesthetics “In addition to studies rooted in the Byzantine and Slavic traditions we would be delighted also to consider papers on topics connected to theology and aesthetics in the Arab, Armenian, Coptic, Ethiopian, Georgian, Syriac, and other Eastern Christian cultural communities in late antiquity and the middle ages as well. Comparative work with other religious traditions is also welcome, so long as it demonstrates a firm grasp of the various traditions it addresses.”
  • All three of the Chaucer Review’s panels:Chaucer and Power 1: Governance/Resistance: This session seeks papers that explore Chaucer’s treatment of the operation of, or resistance to, contemporary social, political, and economic systems. Possible topics may include, but are not limited to: democracy and populism; socialist or capitalist economic relations; hierarchical relationships; urban and manorial social structures; rebellion and suppression; authority and dependency; the politics of religion, education, or language. Chaucer and Power 2: Gender/Post-Gender: In light of contemporary discussions of gender and power such as consent and coercion (#metoo), this session seeks new frameworks by which to examine Chaucer’s work. We invite papers that treat gender in any of its manifestations, including work that draws on new frontiers created by feminism, queer and trans theory, non-binary gender, transnational and post-colonial studies, and past/present studies. How might Chaucer push us to rethink relationships of desire? How might his work reinforce or disrupt normative notions of gender and power? Chaucer and Power 3: Empathy/Revulsion: This session seeks papers that examine particular moments of empathetic or dismissive response that illuminate Chaucer’s art and ideas. How does Chaucer push us to consider or inhabit the thoughts and feelings of others? How does he make the bridging of difference an attribute of reading his work? How does he create identifications with or against persons who are the products of late medieval society? How condemnatory or condemned are particular judgments and biases against others?”
  • Putting Women in the Pulpit: A Roundtable about Women and Preaching “The proposed roundtable, then, will feature reflections about women in Anglo-Saxon and related preaching texts as well as the work of women on medieval homiletics, in order to showcase medieval female voices, past scholarship, and a forum for lively discussion of future directions. With the hopes of foregrounding the study of gender in Anglo-Saxon studies, this roundtable will provide an intervention in historiography meant to celebrate the legacy of women in the field.”
  • Periodization “This panel provides a timely forum for reconsidering the question of periodization and directing it to new research problems…medieval studies must build bridges with postcolonial studies if medieval studies is to avoid Eurocentrism even as it attacks presentism. That is, the issue of time and temporality has been bound up, in Western historiography, with the issue of space and spatiality. To question the medieval/modern divide may also amount to questioning the European/non-European divide.”
  • Queyntes, Cuckolds, and Handsy Clerks: Toxic Masculinity and Medieval Bro Culture: One of the most popular of Geoffrey Chaucer’s Canterbury Talesis without a doubt The Miller’s Tale—but why?  While the physical comedy of hendeNicholas grabbing the miller’s wife Alisoun by the queynte and getting a hot colter in the nethers after a fart joke is rollicking fun in the classroom, Nicholas’ behaviors and sexual morés grate against the culture of informed consent and equality we foster as educators.  Nor is Nicholas’ behavior uncharacteristic from a medieval perspective:  From the homosocial bragging rights and cuckoldry of chivalric romance to the real life drunken profligacy of the scholarly class inspiring Chaucer’s satirical portrayal of Nicholas, representations of medieval masculinity ape many of the same reductive stereotypes that we seek to confront in our current discourses on sex and power. This panel seeks papers that will explore these manifestations of sexual license and gender-essentializing behavior in medieval history and literature in order to inform our current debates about toxic masculinity in our own media and politics.  If we are to understand our role in educating future generations about consent and gender, we must first engage with the enduring legacy of male homosocial narratives that marginalize women’s agency and excuse men’s objectification of women.  In other words, we need to develop a critical appraisal of the roots of medieval “bro” culture and their continued relevance for our present-day social realities of consent and exploitation. Please submit an abstract for a 15- to 20-minute presentation to Matthew O’Donnell at mdodonne@umail.iu.edu.
  • Nevertheless, She Resisted: Centering Female Will and Consent in Medieval Literature: As Amy Vines notes, rape in medieval literature often functions as a “chivalric necessity,” a means of articulating masculine identity that elides or ignores questions of female bodily sovereignty and autonomy of will in favor of the male protagonist’s development. Yet we also find instances where texts implicitly or explicitly call attention to the act of rape as a violation of female will, either in dread of the act, in the face of its perpetration, or its aftermath. Building on recent work by Vines, Christine Rose, Suzanne Edwards, and Carissa Harris, this session seeks papers of 15-20 minutes exploring narratives of resistance in medieval literary portrayals of rape. In what ways do such narratives recenter female will and consent? What different modes of resistance to sexual violence do they articulate? To what extent do they return agency to survivors of sexual violence? Please submit an abstract for a 15- to 20-minute presentation to Alison Langdon at alison.langdon@wku.edu.
  • Visualizing Identity in the Middle Ages: Coins, Seals and Material Culture: “This session explores the multifarious ways that artists visualized identity in the material culture of the Middle Ages, particularly in coins and seals as well as in other objects.  How did such objects serve as vehicles for claims of identity, as well as related claims of authority and legitimacy, with goals or subtexts that included the politics of self- presentation; the construction of personal, civic, national and cultural identity; the advertisement of dynastic succession, and much more?  How did medieval beholders experience these messages and how did this experience contribute to the value of these objects as powerful forces of social, cultural, and political legitimization? Intentionally broad in its focus and designed to transcend national and cultural boundaries, this session seeks papers from late antiquity through the 15th century that consider any aspect of this topic and/or shift the interpretive emphasis of what is conventionally thought of as medieval art, from aesthetic or formalist toward function, agency, presentation and reception. Papers extending disciplinary boundaries and utilizing interdisciplinary approaches and methodologies are particularly welcome. Abstracts of no more than 300 words and a completed Participant Information Form should be sent to Susan Solway at ssolway@depaul.edu.  Deadline: September 15.”
  • Playing the Past: Race, Gender, and Heroism in Gaming (A Roundtable):Video and PC gaming have come to play a substantial role in popular consciousness in the 21st century and the medium itself offers a uniquely immersive experience unfathomable in other facets of popular culture. In virtual “medieval” and fantasy worlds, a player gets the chance to live the story rather than being a passive observer, and in MMORPGs like World of Warcraft, he or she can even relate to other players as that character, experiencing the world as priest or paladin existing in an expansive virtual space. However, the interactive nature of these games also raises important questions about how we conceptualize and create the past and the impact these imagined worlds can have on notions of the “medieval” for a non-academic audience. Often these games leave women behind in the role of damsels in distress, drawing from modern conceptions of “medieval” chivalric codes that do not make space for female adventurers and heroes. Moreover, race often refers to various humanoid creatures like trolls and goblins, and these fantasy “races” are often included in lieu of real racial and ethnic diversity on the grounds that fantasy creatures are somehow “more medieval.” When a developer chooses to include women or people of color in their “medieval” video game, alt-right gamer movements like Gamergate have resisted, claiming the game has become “ahistorical” by allowing anyone but white men into their pseudo-medieval fantasy. This roundtable will raise questions about how the past has been used in gaming to alienate non-white, non-male players, and the extent to which gaming developers have managed to resist medievalist tropes as held in popular consciousness. Each participant will give a 7-10-minute presentation, which will be followed by a roundtable discussion. Possible topics can include but are not limited to constructions of the past in video game medievalisms, problematic uses of race and gender in fantasy gaming, and the mobilization of faux medievalism against inclusivity by online movements like Gamergate. Please submit a 200 word abstract to Ali Frauman at afrauman@indiana.edu by September 15th, 2018and direct any questions to the same address. Thank you!
  • Dreams and Visions in a Global Context: The western medieval world’s most comprehensive dream encyclopedia, Oneirocriticon Achmetis, derives from Arabic sources, yet much current engagement with the medieval realm of dreams and visions remains western- and eurocentric. This panel seeks papers addressing how dreams are understood, maneuvered, deployed, and creatively fictionalized across global borders and the western-eastern cultural divide. That is, I am explicitly interested in papers that do not focus primarily on western and Anglocentric medieval dream cultures, but that think through the meaning of dreams and/or visions for eastern cultural and religious written and oral traditions from various contexts. Papers that explore cultural exchange between eastern and western dream and vision traditions are also welcome. In the current sociopolitical moment, it is more urgent than ever that we step beyond our institutional, geographical, and disciplinary silos to expose ourselves to other forms of thinking, feeling and being, both in and beyond the material world. While there is clearly work being done on eastern mystical and visionary traditions, there is little crossover between scholars working in other global disciplines and those from English and associated departments. Ideally, this panel will draw a range of interest from scholars working in the realm of medieval dreams and visions across a variety of geographical and cultural contexts, thus serving the overarching goal of decolonizing the university in attempting to displace whiteness and westernness as the center against which other traditions are simply marginal. The visionary potential of dreams offers a particularly fruitful lens through which to apprehend these cultural differences and points of contact. Contact: Dr. Boyda Johnstone, bjohnstone1@fordham.edu
  • Vices and Virtues: Gender, Subversion, and Moralizing Discourses: Significant watersheds in medieval Christianity have often entailed the reconceptualization of notions of vice and virtueand of gender. From the twelfth-century “renaissance” and “reformation,” amid the thirteenth-century “pastoral revolution,” and after the rediscovery of Aristotle, these two conceptual categories formed a mutually influential discourse. However, much of the scholarship on the development of discourses of vice and virtue has not incorporated gender as a central category of analysis, outside of specific case studies, if at all. Where gender has been addressed it has often been treated primarily as an egalitarian, gender-neutral discourse. Certainly, on one level, one’s susceptibility to vice or the development of virtue was not the domain of one or another gender, but this did not stop medieval people from creatively deploying them in gendered terms. Despite this seemingly ambivalent relationship to gender, medieval Christians wielded virtue and vice to organize social hierarchies, construct theoretical and practical anthropologies, and,
    as in telling cases such as Prudentius’ Psychomachia, to subvert gender binaries.
    This panel will aim both to interrogate and theorize, broadly, the extent to which moralizing discourses concerning the vices and virtues incorporated notions of gender and vice versa. How does the gendering of specific personifications of
    vices and virtues reinforce and subvert medieval discourses about gender? How do normative commitments to gender roles and performances structure programmatic and didactic accounts of vice and virtue? To what extent does the intersection of vice and virtue with gendered language change between different religious or non-religious contexts, for example between monasteries, the universities, and popularizing works for the laity, or in the politics of the nobility? How may recent gender- and queer- theoretical thought equip us to interpret medieval writings on vice and virtue? Given these variegated questions, we seek an interdisciplinary panel and welcome proposals from scholars of religion, philosophy, literature, art history, and history. If interested, please send abstracts of no more than 250 words including your name title, and affiliation along with a completed Participant Information Form to the session organizers, Jacob Doss (jacobwdoss@utexas.edu) or Matthew Vanderpoel (vanderpoelensis@uchicago.edu).
  • The Medieval in Children’s Literature: Although the presence of medieval elements in children’s literature has long been acknowledged, this session invites papers that explore how recent children’s literature authors extend their treatment of the medieval beyond the conventional heroes of Britain, and Europe in general. Authors retell tales of beowulf, Robin Hood, and King Arthur with female and non-binary protagonists, filling in gaps of tradition narratives, and creating new characters to engage with these older themes. This session particularly seeks papers that address issues of diversity in race, gender and sexuality, religion, and/or geography in children’s literature that treats of the medieval, both Western and non-Western. Deadline for proposals is September 15, 2018. Please submit an abstract for a 15- to 20-minute presentation to Kristin Bovaird-Abbo at Kristin.BovairdAbbo@unco.edu.
  • Complicit: White Women and the Project of Empire: Women in medieval texts are often read as oppressed, powerless, and without agency. This panel asks how our readings of women, such as Constance in Chaucer’s Man of Law’s Tale or the Princess of Tars from The King of Tars, change when we view these women as not simply acted upon, but as complicit in the scenes of conversion and imperial power that dominate these narratives. This panel seeks papers that move beyond reading women in narratives of imperial dominance as solely victims of patriarchal structures of power, and asks what it means to recognize complicity with the project of empire alongside patriarchal oppression. The goal of this panel is to offer intersectional analyses of the project of patriarchy alongside the project of empire through a reexamination of how we define and understand women’s agency. Send abstracts, Participant Information Form, and other inquiries to Shyama Rajendran (shyama.rajendran@gmail.com).
  • #MEditerraneanTOO: Neither rape culture nor women’s collective activism against sexual harassment and gender-based violence are 21st century phenomena, nor are they exclusive to the US. As a collaboration between the Association of Spanish and Portuguese Historical Studies and the Society of Medieval Feminist Scholarship, this panel seeks papers that examine these topics transregionally, specifically around the multi-religious environment of the medieval Mediterranean. A range of methodologies is welcome – literary assessments of the querelle des femmes, court cases on the definition of rape, archival work on sex workers and violence, laws on forced concubinage between religious traditions, analysis of hagiographic tropes of forced marriage, etc. Organizer: Jessica Boon. Send abstracts, Participant Information Form, and other inquiries to jboon@email.unc.edu.
  • Nasty Women: Villains, Witches, Rebels in the Middle Ages: Recent debates in modern discourse have centered around appropriate boundaries of feminine behavior. “Nastiness” has become a by-word for a specific type of womanhood, one that pushes the boundaries of acceptable sexual agency, political power, and social hierarchies. This panel will explore the various ways in “nastiness” existed in the Middle Ages, with a particular focus on gender and sexuality. How did contemporary authors, philosophers, or courts depict or deal with subversive women? How did women conceive of their own power in terms of sexual acts, gender expression, and other forms of socially-rebellious behavior? The papers in this session will address these issues through several lenses, providing new insight in the critical discourses of queer and feminist medieval scholarship. Send abstracts, Participant Information Form, and other inquiries to Graham Drake (drake@geneseo.edu).
  • Medieval and Modern anti-Semitisms: Central to historical work on anti-Semitism has been a certain disagreement over the question of continuity: do modern anti-Semitic formations build directly on premodern (and specifically medieval) constructions or do they develop more independently, out of the forces that shape modern sociality (nation states, global economic empires, modern conceptions of race). This session will bring together work on both medieval and modern moments and texts to consider the ways in which medieval anti-Semitic texts and tropes might be sui generis, or alternatively might be taken up and reworked into new, modern forms. Please send a 250-word abstract, along with a completed Participant Information Form by September 15 to Steven Kruger (skruger@gc.cuny.edu).
  • Non-Christian Medievalists Studying the Middle Ages: This session will continue the work of our sponsored Kalamazoo 2018 session, in which medievalists from conservative religious backgrounds (mostly Christian, but also Jewish) reflected on their work in academic medievalism. Here, we invite scholars either to reflect on how their own non-Christian backgrounds shape their work on medieval materials or to think about the significance of the work of non-Christian medievalists (Morton Bloomfield, Israel Gollancz, Sheila Delany, et al.) for medieval studies. Please send a 250-word abstract, along with a completed Participant Information Form by September 15 to Steven Kruger (skruger@gc.cuny.edu).
  • Father Chaucer and the Critics: The Problems of Chaucerian Biography in the 21st Century: Organizers: Sarah Baechle and Carissa Harris. Please send a one-page abstract to sebaechl@olemiss.edu and carissa.harris@temple.edu by September 15, 2018. The 1380 document, enrolled in the Chancery by Cecily Chaumpaigne and releasing Geoffrey Chaucer from all charges “de raptu meo” [relating to my rape], has long been a thorn in the side of Chaucer scholars looking for ways to explain Chaucer’s actions. Chaucer has been imagined to have perpetrated various lesser offenses, including the termination of a love affair, an ill-advised youthful seduction, or an attempt to remedy “the heat of passion or exasperation [in which] he may indeed have raped her” (Howard, Chaucer: His Life, His Work, His World 319). Chaucer’s oeuvre poses similar challenges: scholarship on the Reeve’s Tale seeks ways to understand the clerks John and Aleyn’s actions toward the Miller’s wife and daughter outside the rubric of sexual violence, while the antisemitism of the Prioress’ Tale is varyingly blamed on other figures—The Prioress, Chaucer’s fictional pilgrim self—rather than the author, or even removed from conversation altogether as anachronism (Blurton and Johnson, The Critics and the Prioress 4). This roundtable seeks to interrogate the ways in which current scholarship responds to ethical difficulties in Chaucer’s life records and in his literature. We invite short five-to-seven-minute talks investigating the areas in which Chaucer scholarship continues to fear to (metaphorically) tread.  Panelists might consider new or unexpected biographical details or Chaucerian attitudes which scholars continue to excuse; they can explore the rhetorical strategies that scholarship uses to deflect unsavory interpretations of Chaucer and his life records; or they might read Chaucer’s biographical shortcomings alongside the complexities of his controversial texts. We particularly welcome talks which address the assumptions about Chaucer, the canon, and authorship that attempt to reinscribe the poet as a figure above reproach; talks considering what modern readers imagine to be at stake in calling Chaucer a rapist, a racist, or an anti-Semite; and talks which take intersectional approaches, considering the problems of Chaucerian racism and rape as they inform one another. In exploring Chaucerian scholarship’s discomfort with the Chaumpaigne release and the Prioress’ Tale’s antisemitism, this panel extends the work of scholars like Susan Morrison, Heather Blurton, and Hannah Johnson. We seek to respond to and advance their efforts to suggest new interventions in Chaucer criticism that accommodate a more complex picture of the poet and his work.

***

And finally, some panels that don’t really address these issues at all, but to which anyone who wants can submit a paper that does take a more direct and overt “SJW” approach!

 


Bonus: I like having a list without all the distracting details, so that I can skim through it and get a sense of the overview – so here it is!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s