Ktismatics

13 November 2009

Speculations Yes

Filed under: Reflections — ktismatics @ 9:36 am

Just to add my two cents, I’m in full support of Speculations, the new online, open-access journal that Paul Ennis of Anotherheideggerblog is making happen. It would be perfectly great if the entire editorial board and most of the contributors are grad students and unaffiliated scholars, inasmuch they almost surely know more about object-oriented philosophy than do most of the philosophy faculty. I think it’s also a strong and generous act of support that Graham Harman and Levi Bryant will be contributing papers outlining the theoretical issues.

Fabio at hyper tiling opined recently that he tends to lose focus on blog posts exceeding a thousand words. Me too. Journal articles are a different sort of writing, calling for a different sort of reading. Why wait for the authorities to put their imprimatur on a field of study or a publication, or even an author? DIY.

Advertisements

2 Comments »

  1. The editorial board will consist of graduate students and I’m hoping that it’ll be a pretty open affair. There are 3-4 of us at this point. As for contribitions I’m hoping for a mix but so far it looks like the strongest interest is from graduate students (although I should note we are looking at at least one non-graduate paper being submitted in later issues at this point that does not come from the three main OOO theorists). Thanks for the support.

    Like

    Comment by Paul Ennis — 14 November 2009 @ 7:01 am

  2. I hope it’s a great success as a forum for letting people explore the ideas together in a more focused and detailed manner. The OOO enthusiasts seem pretty sharp and can clearly take care of themselves intellectually. Also, the precedent of iconoclasm has already been established by the “founding fathers,” so fears that the journal becoming a shrine tended by acolytes strike me as an entertaining fantasy. In catering to some of the expressed desires of the blogosphere, it might be fun to have a “destroy OOO” section of the publication, see whether the dismantling proves persuasive or contributes paradoxically to a stronger edifice.

    Like

    Comment by john doyle — 14 November 2009 @ 3:49 pm


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: