Leonardo Digital Reviews
 LDR Home  Index/Search  Leonardo On-Line  About Leonardo  Whats New








Reviewer biography

Current Reviews

Review Articles

Book Reviews Archive

The 17th Annual Conference of the Society for Literature and Science

Austin, Texas. October 23-26, 2003


Reviewed by Michael Punt
Mpunt@easynet.co.uk


The theme of this year's conference of the Society of Literature and Science was Rethinking Space + Time Across Science, Literature, and the Arts. Divided into 6 streams (literature, literature and media, art history, art and media, theory across disciplines, science, technology medicine and mathematics) the conference attracted around three hundred delegates and presenters most of whom were keen to share their research with others in an interdisciplinary field that has become established through this and other academic initiatives. Distributed over two and a half days the complexity of the preplanning of this event was matched only by the enormity of the task that the attendees had choosing where to be next. Such was the richness and potential of what was at stake that it was almost impossible to do justice to the intellectual energy that the event had attracted.

Three main disciplines were active in the gathering: art history, literary criticism, and media theory. Some scientists and artists also contributed, although largely under the rubric of art and literature. The papers that were delivered ranged from very specific and detailed reports of ongoing research into a particular question, to ambitious attempts to deal with meta-issues and the future of specific strands of academic study. In particular the impact of new modes of distribution and reception on narrative structure, and the consequences of 'n-dimensional' space for art history (as a discipline) seemed to capture the most imaginations. Science, when it was on the agenda, seemed to comprise either science fiction or discussions of parascience in all its manifestations from telepathy to spiritualism and beyond. There were of course no conclusions to this debate, rather the usual academic elaboration of the tapestry of concerns adding more and more detail to be accounted for. For those who chose to participate in the dynamic exchanges, the conference offered a brief, but intense charge to the system which helped to shake off the residues of the ivory tower that lone scholars acquire during the long hours of solitary page turning. It also offered a sense of belonging to many who were clearly working on topics under the impression that they were intellectually isolated. Such immediate benefits, however, are mere reminders of the real opportunities that the topic offered: nothing less than the rescue of a number of discourses spiralling out of control under the inflationary pressure of exponential growth.

Linda Dalrymple Henderson and Bruce Clarke, who organised the event and somehow made everything happen in sequence and on time have marked a radical research agenda and it is a pity that their initiatives were not more fully exploited by all the participants. Instead there was the occasional myopia as some papers stayed within their own terms as if the audience was not  framing the discussion that made their  particular historical or theoretical research significant. At its worst one was often left with the impression that there was little interest in being heard (much less understood) as a number of speakers read a chapter, or reiterated the research from a graduate thesis at breakneck speed. Thankfully, however, most presentations seized the opportunities that the committee had made available and took risks with new ideas that could be tested in a supportive, yet critical environment of peers. Some of the credit for this atmosphere needs to go to Linda Henderson's own published research which clearly liberated the discussion to include topics that some years ago would have been closeted out of sight of mainstream art history. Her's was a risky strategy but it is now clear that the disavowal of a generalised dissatisfaction with a single reality evident at the scientific and artistic margins of the twentieth century is no longer sustainable, and one of the achievements of this conference was to show the extent to which a radical engagement with meta-issues can offer an alternative to the cul-de-sac of a narrow empiricism driven by the idea of progress.

The Society of Literature and Science (currently reviewing its name so as to appear more inclusive and engage directly with artists) is clearly an intellectual community driven by ideas that are central to  the Leonardo community, and one which has the revisionist potential in the arts and sciences that serves the wider ambitions of contemporary historiography Their next conference, in Paris 2004, is already at the planning stage and tracking its progress can be done on line at: http://english.ttu.edu/sls where the abstracts of this year's papers are also available. On the basis of the 17th conference this is certainly an event to pencil in for next year.

Note: SLS Paris 2004 is co-organized by Yves Abrioux (Université Paris 3), Noëlle Batt (Université Paris 8) and Mathieu Duplay (Université Lille 3.email: slsparis04@aol.com).

 

 

 

 

top







Updated 1st December 2003


Contact LDR: ldr@leonardo.org

Contact Leonardo: isast@leonardo.info


copyright © 2003 ISAST