From the WPA listserve (which I just joined a few days ago), Richard Miller’s 7-minute presentation to the Rutger University’s Board of Governors:
I would say that the Humanities, in the last 10-20 years, somewhat lost its way in becoming overly focused on critique. The real function of the Humanities is to engage in the act of creativity, moment by moment, to improve the quality of the world we live in.
Ooh interesting.
…but “collaboratory” makes me cringe 🙂
I’ll have to watch this at school as dial-up doesn’t do videos any good, but please send me the link for the listserv as I thought I was on it but now realize I haven’t had a thing from them so must not be.
I am moving along with my proposal, however, for their newly announced deadline of March 15.
Stanley Fish has an interesting argument about humanities in an essay in the Everything’s an Argument textbook – at work – so I’ll come back and add it.
Reid, do you mean in that “collaboratory” is a neologism (I cringe to say “not a word”)? I think “collaborative” would have worked just as well.
Sara, he WPA-listserv can be found here. I don’t think I’ve read that Fish essay — I also have the feeling that I would disagree with the argument, if he make similar points as he does in his NY Times blog. I’ll reserve judgment, though.
HI Michael and others responding to this very interesting post from Richard Miller and Rutgers,
I must say that it seems to me that Richard has got it right, and I find myself wishing that we had the opportunity to build a New Humanities Center here at OSU.
BTW, the space in the library where the Writing Desk and other peer tutoring activities is held is called the Collaboratory. I don’t personally have any problem with that word.
Thanks again!
Lisa
Oh, I didn’t re-watch the video when Reid wrote about “Collaboratory,” so I had forgotten the context and thought it was being used as an adjective. I do think it’s a cool word for a collaborative lab.
“collaboratory” is the term used by HASTAC — so there’s a strong precedent!