Littérature scientifique sur le sujet « Families – Addresses, essays, lectures »

With special attention to Tagore’s two plays Bisarjan and Acalāyatan the paper considers to what extent Tagore’s thought as expounded in his lectures and essays in English and Bengali is relevant to the understanding of his literary works. Are there dangers in reading his works through the filter of his ideas and ideals? Would his creative works seem different if we pretended that his discursive writings did not exist? The paper addresses such questions in order to suggest a fresh approach to Tagore in his 150th anniversary year (2011).

Abstract We describe how a partnership between design and gerontology introduces students to concepts of legacy, meaning making and empathy in an undergraduate design course. Introduction to Design Thinking is offered through the Multi-disciplinary Design Program at the University of Utah and is a class that explores concepts such as the design process, human-centered design, rapid prototyping and multidisciplinary team dynamics. In collaboration with faculty from design, medicine and gerontology, the course addresses real-world problems by navigating across disciplines such as art, business, engineering, science, and gerontology. Five phases of the design process are introduced: Observation (collecting material), Analysis (finding patterns and insight), Ideation (solution exploration), Refinement, and Implementation (communication). To apply these processes, students engage in a group project where they interact with older adults residing in long term care (e.g., assisted living). Students undergo HIPAA training and didactic lectures covering narrative interviewing and aging content such as long term care and generativity prepare students for interacting with residents. Throughout the semester, students meet with the older adult to understand, gather, construct and then develop a designed artifact that reflects the stories and the memories of the participating residents. The designed artifacts (e.g., memory maps, videos, small books) are presented and given to the participating residents and their families. This project results in rich stories for both the residents and students. Students also gain interviewing and empathy skills necessary for designing compelling artifacts and potentially age-friendly long term care environments where 2 million older adults live.

Resumo: Autor de uma obra filosófica abrangente, Alasdair MacIntyre manifesta um interesse profundo pelo tema da educação, tendo refletido, em particular, seriamente sobre a universidade. Sua concepção de universidade é fortemente influenciada por aquela defendida por John Henry Newman no século XIX, e se relaciona intimamente, tanto quanto para Newman, com a sua compreensão sobre a filosofia. Partindo de tal concepção, é possível refletir sistematicamente sobre a questão do ensino de filosofia, tanto no interior da vida universitária quanto nas relações desta última com a sociedade e a cultura em geral, inclusive com um foco particular sobre a realidade brasileira. Palavras-chave: Alasdair MacIntyre (1929-). John Henry Newman (1801-1890). Universidade. Ensino de filosofia. Abstract: Authoring a comprehensive philosophical oeuvre, Alasdair MacIntyre manifests a profound interest on the subject of education, having produced in particular a serious reflection on the theme of the university. His conception of a university is strongly influenced by that of John Henry Newman in the 19th century, and is intimately related, as much as with Newman’s, to his understanding of philosophy. Beginning with such a conception, it is possible to systematically meditate on the matter of the teaching of philosophy, within the university walls as well as at its general cultural and social boundaries, including a particular focus on Brazilian reality. Keywords: Alasdair MacIntyre (1929-). John Henry Newman (1801-1890). University. Philosophy teaching. REFERÊNCIAS ARRIOLA, Claudia Ruiz. Tradición, Universidad y Virtud: Filosofia de la Educacion Superior en Alasdair MacIntyre. Pamplona: EUNSA, 2000. ARISTÓTELES. Ethica Nicomachea. In: MCKEON, Richard (Org.). The Basic Works of Aristotle. New York: The Modern Library, 2001. ARTIGAS, Mariano. Mind of the Universe: Understanding Science and Religion. Philadelphia: Templeton Foundation, 1999. BISHOP, Jeffrey P. Waiting for St. Benedict among the Ruins: MacIntyre and Medical Practice. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 36 (2011), p. 107-113. BRASIL. Lei de Diretrizes e Bases da Educação Nacional. Lei nº 9.394, 20 dez. 1996. Brasília: Diário Oficial da União, 1996. BRASIL. Lei nº 13.415, 16 fev. 2017. Brasília: Diário Oficial da União, 2017. BREWER, Kathryn Balstad. Management as a Practice: A Response to Alasdair MacIntyre. Journal of Business Ethics, 16 (1997), p. 825-833. CAVANAUGH, William T. The Myth of Religious Violence: Secular Ideology and the Roots of Modern Conflict. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009. CERLETTI, Alejandro. O ensino de filosofia como problema filosófico. Trad. Ingrid Müller Xavier. Belo Horizonte: Autêntica, 2009. CROSS, Bryan R. MacIntyre on the Practice of Philosophy and the University. American Catholic Philosophical Quaterly, 88, 4 (2014), p. 751-766. CUNHA, Luiz Antonio. A universidade temporã: o ensino superior, da Colônia à era Vargas. 3. ed. São Paulo: Ed. UNESP, 2007. DUNNE, Joseph. Arguing for Teaching as a Practice: A Reply to Alasdair MacIntyre. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 37, 2 (2003), p. 353-369. DUNNE, Joseph. Newman Now: Re-Examining the Concepts of ‘Philosophical’ and ‘Liberal’ in The Idea of a University. British Journal of Educational Studies, 54, 4 (2006), p. 412-428. DEINA, Wanderley José. Filosofia no ensino médio: considerações sobre a reforma educacional brasileira a partir do pensamento de Theodor Adorno. Sofia, 6, 3 (2017), pp. 5-25. FÓRUM NACIONAL PERMANENTE DO ENSINO RELIGIOSO. Parâmetros Curriculares Nacionais para o Ensino Religioso. 3. ed. São Paulo: Ave Maria, 1997. GALLO, Sílvio. A filosofia e seu ensino: conceito e transversalidade. Ethica, 13, 1 (2006), p. 17-35. GOMES, Laécio de Almeida. Filosofia como educação moral: a filosofia da educação em Alasdair MacIntyre. Saberes, 1, 6 (2011), p. 65-76. GOMES, Roberto. Crítica da razão tupiniquim. 11. ed. São Paulo: FTD, 1994. GONTIJO, Pedro. O ensino da filosofia no Brasil: algumas notas sobre avanços e desafios. Perspectivas, 2, 1 (2017), p. 3-17. GOVERNO DO ESTADO DO PARANÁ. Diretrizes Curriculares da Educação Básica – Ensino Religioso. Curitiba: Secretaria de Estado da Educação do Paraná, 2008. HALDANE, John. MacIntyre’s Thomist revival: What’s next? In: HALDANE, John. Faithful Reason: Essays Catholic and Philosophical. London: Routledge, 2004, p. 15-30. KERR, Clark. The Uses of a University. 5. ed. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2001. LAMBETH, Edmond B. Waiting for a New St. Benedict: Alasdair MacIntyre and the Theory and Practice of Journalism. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 5, 2 (1990), p. 75-87. MACINTYRE, Alasdair. The Idea of an Educated Public. In: HAYDON, Graham (Org.). Education and Values: The Richard Peters Lectures. London: University of London Press, 1987, p. 15-35. MACINTYRE, Alasdair. Three Rival Versions of Moral Enquiry: Encyclopaedia, Genealogy, and Tradition. Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1990a. MACINTYRE, Alasdair. First Principles, Final Ends and Contemporary Philosophical Issues. Milwaukee: Marquette University, 1990b. MACINTYRE, Alasdair. Justiça de quem? Qual racionalidade? Trad. Marcelo Pimenta Marques. São Paulo: Loyola, 1991. MACINTYRE, Alasdair. Dependent Rational Animals: Why Human Beings Need the Virtues. Peru (Il): Open Court, 1999. MACINTYRE, Alasdair. Depois da virtude: um estudo em teoria moral. Trad. Jussara Simões. Bauru (SP): EDUSC, 2001. MACINTYRE, Alasdair. Moral Philosophy and Contemporary Social Practice: What Holds Them Apart? In: MACINTYRE, Alasdair. The Tasks of Philosophy: Selected Essays, Volume I. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006, p. 104-122. MACINTYRE, Alasdair. God, Philosophy, Universities: A Selective History of the Catholic Philosophical Tradition. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefields, 2009a. MACINTYRE, Alasdair. The Very Idea of a University: Aristotle, Newman and Us. The New Blackfriars, 91, 1031 (2010), p. 4-19 (2010a) MACINTYRE, Alasdair. On Not Knowing Where You Are Going. Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, 84, 2 (2010), p. 61-74. (2010b) MACINTYRE, Alasdair; DUNNE, Joseph. Alasdair MacIntyre on Education: In Dialogue with Joseph Dunne. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 36, 1 (2002), p. 1-19. MADARIAGA CÉZAR, Manuel García de. La educación en Alasdair MacIntyre: contextos y proyectos. Tese de doutorado. 2009. Pamplona. Facultad Eclesiástica de Filosofía. Universidad de Navarra. MICHEL, Andrew A. Psychiatry After Virtue: A Modern Practice in the Ruins. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 36 (2011), p. 170-186. NEWMAN, John Henry. Prefácio. In: TURNER, Frank M. (Org.). Newman e a idéia de uma universidade. Trad. Gilson César Cardoso de Sousa. Bauru (SP): EDUSC, 2001a, p. 59-71. NEWMAN, John Henry. Introdutório. In: TURNER, Frank M. (Org.). Newman e a idéia de uma universidade. Trad. Gilson César Cardoso de Sousa. Bauru (SP): EDUSC, 2001b, p. 59-71. NEWMAN, John Henry. Teologia, ramo do conhecimento. In: TURNER, Frank M. (Org.). Newman e a idéia de uma universidade. Trad. Gilson César Cardoso de Sousa. Bauru (SP): EDUSC, 2001c, p. 73-89. NEWMAN, John Henry. Relação da teologia com outros ramos do conhecimento. In: TURNER, Frank M. (Org.). Newman e a idéia de uma universidade. Trad. Gilson César Cardoso de Sousa. Bauru (SP): EDUSC, 2001d, p. 91-110. NEWMAN, John Henry. Relação dos outros ramos do conhecimento com a teologia. In: TURNER, Frank M. (Org.). Newman e a idéia de uma universidade. Trad. Gilson César Cardoso de Sousa. Bauru (SP): EDUSC, 2001e, p. 111-130. NEWMAN, John Henry. Conhecimento, fim em si mesmo. In: TURNER, Frank M. (Org.). Newman e a idéia de uma universidade. Trad. Gilson César Cardoso de Sousa. Bauru (SP): EDUSC, 2001f, p. 131-148. NEWMAN, John Henry. O conhecimento em relação à capacidade profissional. In: TURNER, Frank M. (Org.). Newman e a idéia de uma universidade. Trad. Gilson César Cardoso de Sousa. Bauru (SP): EDUSC, 2001g, 169-188. OLIVE, Arabela Campos. Histórico da educação superior no Brasil. In: SOARES, Maria Susana Arrosa (Org.). A educação superior no Brasil. Brasília: Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior, 2002, pp. 31-42. PAVIANI, Jayme. Interdisciplinaridade: conceitos e distinções. 2. ed. Caxias do Sul (RS): Educs, 2008. PINHO, Rozana Isabel Brázio Valente. O ensino de filosofia no Brasil: considerações históricas e político-legislativas. Educação e Filosofia Uberlândia, 28, 56, (2014), p. 757-771. ROHDEN, Valerio (Org.). Idéias de universidade. Canoas: Ed. ULBRA, 2002. ROSSI, Paolo. O Nascimento da Ciência Moderna na Europa. Trad. Antonio Angonese. Bauru (SP): EDUSC, 2001. SANTIAGO, Maria Francilene Câmara; SANTOS, Ivanaldo; SANTOS, Simone Cabral Marinho. Notas sobre o ensino e a iniciação científica na Educação Básica. In: SANTOS, Ivanaldo; SANTIAGO, Maria Francilena Câmara; SANTOS, Simone Cabral Marinho (Org.). Ciência na escola: fazendo, vivendo e experimentando. Curitiba: CRV, 2015, p. 19-32. SANTOS, Ivanaldo. O método de pesquisa em Tomás de Aquino. In: SANTOS, Ivanaldo. (Org.). Método de pesquisa: perspectivas filosóficas. Mossoró (RN): Edições UERN, 2010, p. 25-36. SANTOS, Ivanaldo. A presença de Tomás de Aquino nas universidades. Aquinate, 21 (2013), p. 14-24. SANTOS, Ivanaldo. Ensino religioso: possibilidade de vivência e de convívio da diversidade religiosa do Brasil. In: SILVEIRA, Ronie Alexandro Teles; LOPES, Marcos Carvalho (Org.). A religiosidade brasileira e a filosofia. Porto Alegre: Fi, 2016, p. 252-268. SELLMAN, Derek. Alasdair MacIntyre and the Professional Practice of Nursing. Nursing Philosophy, vol. 1 (2000), p. 26-33. SILVA, Raimundo Fábio da; SANTOS, Ivanaldo. A arte, sua função e a necessidade de seu ensino enquanto disciplina curricular e reflexão filosófica. Revista Ensino Interdisciplinar, 2 (2016), p. 30-41. SNOW, C. P. As duas culturas e um segundo olhar. Trad. Renato Rezende Neto. São Paulo: EDUSP, 1993. STOLZ, Steven A. Alasdair MacIntyre, Rationality and Education: Against Education of Our Age. Cham (Switzerland): Springer, 2019. WAIN, Kenneth. MacIntyre: Teaching, Politics and Practice. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 37, 2 (2003), p. 225-239. WEINBERG, Justin. Notre Dame Philosophers Issue Statement on Threats to Philosophy at Univ. of St. Thomas Houston. Daily Nous. 24 maio 2017. Disponível em: http://dailynous.com/2017/05/24/notre-dame-philosophers-issue-statement-threats-philosophy-univ-st-thomas-houston/. Acesso em: 17 jun. 2019.

If screening had been a drug, it would have been withdrawn from the market. Thus, which country will be first to stop mammography screening? (Peter C. Gøtzsche) 1This issue of RBMFC addresses the subject of medical ethics, the backbone that should guide both the demands in health services and health technologies provision, as well as the practice of family and community physicians. As a stimulus for reflection, the Debate section tackles the “Preventive mandatory mammography” policy in Uruguay, while in the Section Essays, Jamoulle and Gomez discuss the concept of quaternary prevention: action that aims to offer ethically acceptable alternatives to patients in order to prevent the excess of medical interventions.2 Despite considerable technological and social transformations that directly affect people’s health, ethics in medicine continues to morally shape health problems and health policy decisions with implications for patients, physicians and health institutions.In a practical analytical and easy to understand guidance for health professionals, Gillon3 discusses the four principles and scope of medical ethics: autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence and justice. The latter encompasses the distributive justice, individual right justice and legal justice. These four principles provide a baseline for dialogue across different cultures, religious beliefs and political positions, as these principles are considered to be prima facie: a duty which is compulsory on all occasions unless it is in conflict with equal or stronger duties.4 Thus, based on these four principles that underlie ethics in medicine and consequently the application of the quaternary prevention, cancer screening programme will be critically analysed as a preventative strategy.Screening programmes entails the use of an initial selective tool or a sieve phase (i.e. mammography) to separate asymptomatic persons within the target population, that will need to undergo a classificatory or diagnostic phase - which involves a ‘gold standard’ for defining a disease (i.e. anatomopathology) – to finally offer patients a definitive preventive treatment for the condition screened.5 Since this type of intervention is performed on healthy individuals, the ethical requirements in the cases of screening programmes are very high, because the risks of damage are not balanced against real suffering (a clinically manifested disease), but are anchored in a potential future of illness and death. In this case, the principle of non-maleficence (do not harm) prevails over the principle of beneficence (the desire to promote the patients’ wellbeing), since asymptomatic persons, who perceive themselves as healthy, may have their health perception shaken indefinitely due to a biomedical intervention. The most often cited damages in the literature are psychological (due to the uncertainties of false positives, false assurance of false negatives, and borderline conditions that require a closer monitoring such as Cervical Intraepithelial Neoplasia - CIN I, II, III), as well as the physical consequences resulting from treatment itself, such as impotence or urinary incontinence, in the case of screening and treatment of prostate cancer.Since in the screening and/or health check ups the intervention is usually a ‘mirage-guided’ or ‘probability-guided’, it can result in ‘damage without the potential benefits’,6 as in the case of invasive procedures (to clarify ‘images’ or ‘positive’ exam results produced in the selective or sieving phase) which can result in complications, but the biopsy turnout to be normal. For instance, colonoscopy, laparoscopy, biopsies (liver, kidney, prostate), in which those procedures may end up producing complications (intestinal perforation, anaesthesia complications, major artery perforation, sepsis) with the potential to scale up into hospital readmission, with stress for patients and families and/or an even worse scenario: patients’ death with a benign finding. Therefore, screening programmes intrinsically carry the potential to convert healthy people into sick individuals at the population level, and consequently are highly iatrogenic and could be summarized as follows: “For many are called, but few are chosen…,” but many will need to suffer for to very few be cured.This is particularly true in the case of breast cancer screening with mammography, which renders physiopathologically insignificant cancers (overdiagnosis) exposing previously healthy women to significant damages due to radiotherapy. Gotzsche et al.7 highlighted important risks of adverse effects as consequence of radiotherapy, such as heart failure (27%) from circulatory cardiac damage and/or induction of lung cancer (78%). Furthermore, a recently published systematic review in the British Medical Journal8 on the adverse effects of cancer screening, found that only a third of randomized controlled clinical trials was concerned in measuring and controlling for potential harms of screening intervention. This article is very important because it has a direct effect upon the practice of health professionals, who cannot address security parameters on cancer screening interventions with their patients, since there is an information selection bias that emphasizes only the positive aspects of screening, for lack of controlling and monitoring of potential harms in most screening clinical trials.From an ethical stance, this context of uncertainty undermines the patients’ autonomy, creating false empowerment, since women do not have a more complete view on the potential harms and benefits of breast cancer screening programmes.9 To truly empower women and strengthen their autonomy for deciding upon interventions that directly affect their health, there is a need for information to be more transparent and also to reveal potential harms of the interventions. Moreover, the language used for the dissemination of information should be neutral, of simple understanding, culturally accessible, so that the users of the health system can better decide about their own health.3From the perspective of public health, distributive ethic justice, and limited healthcare budget - that any health system faces - screening programmes diverts financial resources - which should primarily be allocated to the treatment and care of sick individuals - towards healthy people, with the potential to produce new real patients, due to the damage of the interventions on healthy bodies, generating more costs to the health system and society in general.Fortunately, screening programmes are increasingly losing their strength, especially in Europe. For instance, the Swiss Medical Board10 found no scientific rational for the maintenance of breast screening programmes in light of current available scientific evidence. In Denmark, the rate of mortality attributable to breast cancer have not reduced due to the implementation of systematic breast cancer screening programme with mammography over 17 years follow up,11 however, it has produced an overdiagnosis rate of 33%.12 Similar trends in mortality over the last 30 years were also observed in the United States,13 as well as in Canada, the accumulated 25 years monitoring of the effects of breast cancer screening, did not render reduction in mortality from breast cancer, but resulted in 22% of overdiagnosis.14 Thus, to Peter C. Gotzsche,1 one of the world ‘s leading authorities on the subject, the best method we have to reduce the occurrence of breast cancer is to stop screening with mammography.From an ethical and scientific point of view,10 screening programmes should be discontinued or restricted to high-risk groups or very specific situations, and the focus of prevention should be redirected towards interventions on early-symptomatic patients, since breast cancer treatment has improved considerably in recent decades, and this is likely to be the responsible for improving the quality of life of affected women.1 The Canadian Task Force15 on preventive health care in their last update (2011) regarded as weak recommendation the breast cancer screening with mammography every 2-3 years in age group 50-69 years-old, because they considered the evidence for screening only of moderate quality. The Brazilian Ministry of Health16 also acted correctly in limiting the financial incentives for breast cancer screening for the age group 50-69 years.Therefore, ‘there is nothing wrong saying no to mammography’,9 because when acting upon asymptomatic healthy people, the principle of non-maleficence should override the principle of beneficence. Thus, the challenge left for family and community doctors is to individualize each case in this ‘sea of uncertainty’, sharing with their patients the often hidden potential harms attributed to cancer screening in order to operationalize in daily practice the concept of quaternary prevention.

IntroductionUniversities in non-Anglophone countries are increasingly implementing English as the medium of instruction (EMI) lectures. There seems to be an assumption that students’ performance on standardized English examinations can be equated with the lexical knowledge needed to comprehend EMI lectures regardless of discipline. For unknown words students encounter, it is assumed that they can be picked up through listening to these lectures. This potential for students to acquire unknown words incidentally while listening to these lectures has yet to be fully explored.MethodsThis study addresses the potential of students incidentally acquiring vocabulary from listening to EMI lectures through corpus analyses of computer science lectures at one public university in Macau. Taking into consideration frequency, range, and lecturer explanation, corpus analyses of the transcripts of 28 computer science lectures (40 h 36 min) were conducted to determine the lexical knowledge needed for students to comprehend the lectures. The potential number of words these students could acquire through listening to the lectures was also uncovered through further analyses.ResultsResults showed that L2 students need to have receptive knowledge of the most frequent 3,000 word families plus proper nouns and marginal words to reach beyond 95% lexical coverage. To reach 98% lexical coverage, 5,000 word families are needed. Considering frequency, range, and teacher explanation, we concluded that 30 new words could reasonably be incidentally acquired after listening to the 28 lectures.DiscussionThese results indicate a need for EMI lecturers to consider the lexical knowledge of students and whether additional pedagogical techniques (i.e., vocabulary explanation) should be employed in content classrooms when lectures are delivered in English, especially for specialized fields such as computer science. Our results also draw attention to the importance of field specific vocabulary and the potential pitfalls of using blanket English language admissions criteria when admitting students to different academic programs.

In the last half of the 19th century the English biologist-educator—rhetorician, Thomas Henry Huxley (1825—95), was a leading expositor and advocate of science, and of Darwinism in particular. At scientific meetings and conventions, in classroom lectures, public presentations, commemorative addresses, after-dinner speeches, books and essays, articles, book reviews and letters to newspapers, he clarified and defended the world of science, often duelling en route with orthodox theology and the older conservative scientists. Friend and foe attested to his rhetorical expertise. His fame and influence was by no means limited to Great Britain, for the European continent and the United States soon knew him well, and indeed the English-speaking world and other areas also came to know of his works.

Introduction: Breaking bad news to patients and families can be challenging for healthcare providers. The present study conducted a systematic review of the literature to determine if formal communication training using the SPIKES protocol improves learner satisfaction, knowledge, performance, or system outcomes. Method: MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL Plus (Nursing & Allied Health Sciences), and PsycINFO Databases were searched with keywords BAD NEWS and SPIKES. Studies were required to have an intervention using the SPIKES model and an outcome that addressed at least one of the four domains of the Kirkpatrick model for evaluating training effectiveness. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was used to conduct a risk of bias assessment. Due to heterogeneity in the interventions and outcomes, meta-analysis was not undertaken and instead, a narrative synthesis was used with the information provided in the tables to summarise the main findings of the included studies. Results: Of 622 studies screened, 37 publications met the inclusion criteria. Interventions ranged from the use of didactic lecture, role play with standardised patients (SPs), video use, debriefing sessions, and computer simulations. Evaluation tools ranged from pre and post intervention questionnaires, OSCE performance with rating by independent raters and SPs, and reflective essay writing. Conclusions: Our systematic review demonstrated that the SPIKES protocol is associated with improved learner satisfaction, knowledge and performance. None of the studies in our review examined system outcomes. As such, further educational development and research is needed to evaluate the impact of patient outcomes, including the optimal components and length of intervention.

(In memory of Chris Newell)With its title 'able', this issue called for articles and essays which explore ability from a disability perspective, rather than disability from an able-ist perspective. One take on the title 'able', is that it invites a fresh perspective on disability, with a focus on abilities and productivities (defined differently, in non-able-ist terms), rather than lack and aberrance. This affirmation of abilities is characteristic of many of the articles and essays in this issue, particularly in the narrative accounts of lived experience. Another take on 'able' evident in these articles is the critique of able-ist assumptions and discourses. Some writers, such as Campbell, Goggin and Wolbring, overtly address the value of insights offered through disability to deconstruct the ‘able-ist’ perspectives which dominate and limit our social worlds, even within disability studies. Campbell provides an overview of scholarship on disablism and able-ism: ‘Disablism’ works as "a set of assumptions (conscious or unconscious) and practices that promote the differential or unequal treatment of people because of actual or presumed disabilities". While Campbell acknowledges the importance of disability studies with its various critiques of the practices and production of disablism, "specifically … examining those attitudes and barriers that contribute to the subordination of people with disabilities in liberal society", she also identifies an ‘able-ist project’ within disability studies, which can serve to reinscribe the able-ist perspective and assumptions. Campbell argues: "the challenge then is to reverse, to invert this traditional approach, to shift our gaze and concentrate on what the study of disability tells us about the production, operation and maintenance of ableism."Goggin also calls for this inverted approach, with scrutiny of the under-examined category ‘able’: If we think of the impact and significance of “whiteness”, as a way to open up space for how to critically think about and change concepts of race; or of “masculinity” as a project for thinking about gender and sexuality — we can see that this interrogation of the unmarked category of “able” and “ability” is much needed. Goggin notes that while disability has been subject to critique and examination (like the all too conspicuous and scrutinised disabled bodies), there has been surprisingly little critique of ability: "nor have we witnessed a thoroughgoing recognition of unmarked, yet powerful operations of ability in our lives and thought". Wolbring also contends that “there is a pressing need for society to deal with ableism in all of its forms and its consequences”. Through his discussion of categories of ‘able’ and ‘ableism’, he identifies a dominant discourse around ‘species-typical’ versus ‘sub-species-typical, defined from the dominant ‘able-ist’ perspective. This discourse has a long history and is linked to the discourse around health, disease and medicine. This is … a model that classifies disabled people as having an intrinsic defect, an impairment that leads to ‘subnormal’ functioning. He insists on the importance of work within Disability Studies which questions that medical model and explores the issue of ‘who defines whom’ as sub-species typical. Many of the articles published here recognise the interdependence of such categories of ‘abled’ and ‘disabled’, drawing attention to the work they perform – usually naturalised and invisible – in producing ‘common sense’ understandings of human value and performance. The able-ist perspective produces disability in terms of lack and deviance from the human norm (which Wolbring calls ‘species typical’). This able-ist production of disability – with its sense of lack and revulsion for the aberrant body/mind – is a powerful undercurrent informing our understanding of human agency. It underpins legitimising discourses which define humanity, particularly modernist discourses of medicine and technology which address the ‘improvement’ of human lives and promise to eradicate disability. It is also crucial to the meaning of so many media narratives, since such narratives, whether in news, documentary or film/tv drama, are predominantly about dilemmas of human agency, of people’s ability or failure to act, to overcome setbacks and limitations. The notion of agency – which drives or impedes the narrative and its resolution – is just as prevalent in media narratives which include people with disability, even those narratives which celebrate their outstanding achievements (in spite of disability). The disability becomes the impediment that must be overcome or be transcended. This more general pattern is represented in emblematic form in many Hollywood action narratives: sometimes the ‘villain’ who impedes the hero’s path is ‘disabled’, or the hero must overcome some disability within themselves (often figured as a temporary disability – such as Superman’s disablement with exposure to kryptonite). While such media stories offer extremes of the ability/disability paradigm, the categories inform our wider debates and understandings of human performance and value. Human agency and the improvement or enablement of this agency – configured in conventional ‘able-ist’ terms – is key to narratives in medical science, technology and innovation, education, as well as in literature and culture, and media narratives which define and interact with our understandings of human activities and performance. Several articles in this issue examine the relationship between technology and innovation, and the able-ist project of modernity and its positioning of people with disability. Goggin addresses the relationship between technology, innovation and disability, calling for a reversal of mainstream logic which sees technology as something which ameliorates disability and improves the lives of people with disability. He points to the work of writers who demonstrate the vital role of people with disability as users of technology, to inform design in the innovation process, and improve the lives of all users of technology. In this context the 'disability perspective' helps break through the limitations of the able-ist perspective. In their article “iTunes Is Pretty (Useless) When You’re Blind”, Kate Ellis and Mike Kent critically examine the promise of digital technology “to open up the world to people with disabilities”, showing the limitations of iPods and iTunes for many people with disabilities (in particular the difficulties for users of screen readers and Braille tablets). They focus on the way that technologies and innovations designed to improve access for people with disabilities “actually enhance access for all users”. They draw on the example of the Lectopia lecture recording and distribution system which has enhanced the educational outcomes for all students where it has been adopted. This resonates with Goggin’s piece on technology and innovation, and the benefits of converging the perspective of the disabled user, with the ‘user’ as considered in technology design. In her article on photographer William Yang’s photographic portraits of his friend Allen dying of AIDS, Catalina Florescu addresses the history of medicine and its role in perpetuating ‘able-ist’ evaluations of disability. In the nineteenth century, how much was medicine responsible for defining ugly as ill, deformed, and getting old, versus beautiful as healthy, and then, for the sake of the community’s health, firmly promoting these ideas? Furthermore, with the rise of photographic art, medicine was able to manipulate and control these ideas even more efficiently. She quotes Deborah Lupton, “the new technology of photography that developed from the mid-nineteenth century became a valuable strategy in the documentation of patterns of disease and illness, and the construction of the sites of dirtiness and contagion”. This emphasis on the historical role of technology in managing and defining, and potentially redefining, understandings of ability and disability, is similar to the scrutiny of technologies that occurs throughout other articles and essays in this issue, including those essays by McDonald, Wain and Place, which address the lived experience of disability. Human agency is also a central theme in cultural and media studies: the modern impulse to bring about social change through critique, depends on a belief in human agency and in the ability to generate change and address social inequalities. The recognition of the role of culture, language and representation, in the contested domain of (unequal) social relations, is vital to critical practice within cultural and media studies. Given this belief in human agency, the assumption that human subjects are able to change the social order, it is vital for practitioners of cultural and media studies, to question the nature of those assumptions, aware that human agency is so often defined in ‘able-ist’ terms. As such the writings in this issue bring a valuable perspective to cultural and media studies more generally, through their critique of the able-ist assumptions that underpin conventional understandings of human agency. Several articles in this issue examine media representations, some drawing attention to those that produce different perspectives on ability and disability. Much has been written about the power of filmic, theatrical and literary representation of disability to engage with, reflect, influence and challenge dominant (able-ist) cultural and social attitudes and narratives (Garland-Thomson, Darke, Shakespeare). Bruno Starrs’ piece on Dance Me to My Song (1997) reveals that while that film is listed in Rolf de Heer’s oeuvre, its primary author is Heather Rose Slattery, a woman with cerebral palsy who wrote, co-directed and played Julie, the lead character. Starrs asserts that in the film Julie is not held up as an object of pity, rather is a fully embodied character, thus defying the “normality drama” (Darke) of disability which aims to "reinforce the able-bodied audience’s self image of normality and the notion of the disabled as the inferior Other". In his article “Disability, Heroism and Australian National Identity”, Martin Mantle analyses Chris Lilley’s 2005 television mocumentary We Can be Heroes: Finding the Australian of the Year. Mantle claims that while disabled characters have been included in Australian national identity narratives, it is questionable whether they have been identified as contributing significantly to "what it means to be Australian". Lilley’s satiric multiple portrayals of disabled and non-disabled characters challenge the assumptions that are made about what kinds of bodies qualify for inclusion in the "development and maintenance of a national character". The ‘ableist’ view of disability as impairment, rendering people passive burdens on society awaiting a ‘cure’, is strongly challenged in the field of disability performance art. Bree Hadley mobilises Rosemarie Garland-Thomson’s comments about the ‘extraordinary’ body of the ‘freak’ and the “stare-and-tell ritual” (337) deployed by disabled performers to examine the ways in which they "negotiate the complexities of the terrain". Hadley considers the theatrical performance of Mat Fraser as Sealo the Sealboy (based on the 1940’s freakshow entertainer Stanley Berent ), arguing that Fraser’s stage strategies deliberately confront an audience, especially a ‘politically correct’ one, with its own ambiguities about and fascination with disabled bodies. A number of the articles in this issue draw directly on the experience and the socially shaped understandings of disability in the ‘everyday lives’ that Campbell and others speak of. Nicole Matthews writes about her charity-funded project, In the Picture which aimed to “generate exemplary inclusive” storylines and illustrations of disabled children in books for young readers by "drawing on the experience of disabled people and families of disabled children". Matthews’ article focuses on the ways in which the label ‘disabled’ is mobilised in an analysis of the variety of responses she received to her project from both disabled and non-disabled stakeholders. She observes with some irony that the pity and charity view of disability is still socially paramount, and one that is often flexed to attract much needed funding for projects such as hers. Donna Mc Donald’s piece “Shattering the Hearing Wall” reveals that one of her aims in writing a series of memoirs about being a ‘deaf woman’ is to produce something that rises above the “stock symbolic scripts”, challenging their tendency to ascribe a singularity of identity to disabled people. Fiona Place candidly records her experiences of being the mother of a child with Down syndrome facing and transcending the “disability as suffering paradigm” proffered by the medical establishment, and generally endorsed by a non-disabled society. She notes that disability is "to be avoided if at all possible and women are expected to take advantage of the advances in reproductive medicine - to choose a genetically correct pregnancy". She questions the promises of genetic screening tests to improve lives: "how safe is it to assume lives are being improved? Could it be… that some lives are now harder rather than easier?" The mother of a child with Down syndrome is seen to have "brought the suffering on herself – of having had choices – tests such as amniocentesis and CVS – but of having failed to take control, failed to prevent the suffering of her child". There is little comprehension that a mother might decide not to submit to the pre-natal genetic test, with its associated risks and consequences – the elimination of the child who is deemed to be a less than ideal choice. Filmmaker Veronica Wain also writes of her experiences as the mother of a child with a “genetic abnormality” – 18q23 deletion. Wain, like Place, confronts the social stigma attached to disability, but finds empowerment in a supportive community, discovering in the process of making the film, what Margrit Shildrick identifies as the vulnerability shared by all human beings. Drawing on the work of Lacan, Schildrick points to the sustaining ‘fantasy’ of the fully realised subject in control of self – a fantasy that is one held dearly by those who identify as able-bodied: the ideal self is phantasmatic, fissured by misidentification, and deeply threatened in its discursively constructed security by the materiality of the anomalous body, in whom signs of disorder and dependency evoke intimations of what has been disavowed. (342) It is the vulnerability of the able- body that is often masked/disavowed by the disabled/abled dichotomy, something which we are reminded of in Catalina Florescu’s account of photographer William Yang’s portraits of Allen who is dying of AIDS. Yang’s series of images starkly intone the body’s "mortal, gradually disabling fabric". Fiona Kumari Campbell’s exhorts us to refuse “ableist normalising dialogue”, to construct a different kind of landscape, a “disability imaginary” based on the “nuances and complexities” of being in and of the world; one which eschews the fixity of absolutes. To address this is to go beyond able/disable dichotomies, to interrogate the ableist- centred narratives of the medico, social, and personal tragedy models of disability presently available, and to refuse disability as a “negative ontology”. Likewise Mairian Corker and Tom Shakespeare advocate that it is time to move beyond limited ways of thinking about and understanding disability. They assert that both the "medical model and the social model seek to explain disability universally, and end up creating totalising, meta-historical narratives that exclude important dimensions of disabled people’s lives and (of ) their knowledge" (15). There can be no unitary or coherent model that fully represents the complexity of either disabled or non-disabled people’s lives; the articles in this issue of M/C Journal go some way towards capturing that complexity. References Corker, Mairian, and Tom Shakespeare, eds. Disability/Postmodernity: Embodying Disability Theory. London: Continuum, 2002. Garland-Thomson, Rosemarie. “Staring Back: Self-Representation of Disabled Performance Artists.” American Quarterly 52.2 (2000): 334-338. Schildrick, Margaret. “Unreformed Bodies: Normative Anxiety and the Denial of Pleasure.” Women’s Studies 34 (2004): 327-344.

Many years ago, while studying in Paris as a novice postgraduate, I was invited to accompany a friend to a seminar with Jacques Derrida. I leapt at the chance even though I was only just learning French. Although I tried hard to follow the discussion, the extent of my participation was probably signing the attendance sheet. Afterwards, caught up on the edges of a small crowd of acolytes in the foyer as we waited out a sudden rainstorm, Derrida turned to me and charmingly complimented me on my forethought in predicting rain, pointing to my umbrella. Flustered, I garbled something in broken French about how I never forgot my umbrella, how desolated I was that he had mislaid his, and would he perhaps desire mine? After a small silence, where he and the other students side-eyed me warily, he declined. For years I dined on this story of meeting a celebrity academic, cheerfully re-enacting my linguistic ineptitude. Nearly a decade later I was taken aback when I overheard a lecturer in philosophy at the University of Sydney re-telling my encounter as a witty anecdote, where an early career academic teased Derrida with a masterful quip, quoting back to him his own attention to someone else’s quote. It turned out that Spurs, one of Derrida’s more obscure early essays, employs an extended riff on an inexplicable citation found in inverted commas in the margins of Nietzsche’s papers: “J’ai oublié mon parapluie” (“I have forgotten my umbrella”). My clumsy response to a polite enquiry was recast in a process of Chinese whispers in my academic community as a snappy spur-of-the-moment witticism. This re-telling didn’t just selectively edit my encounter, but remixed it with a meta-narrative that I had myself referenced, albeit unknowingly. My ongoing interest in the more playful breaches of scholarly conventions of quotation and attribution can be traced back to this incident, where my own presentation of an academic self was appropriated and remixed from fumbler to quipster. I’ve also been struck throughout my teaching career by the seeming disconnect between the stringent academic rules for referencing and citation and the everyday strategies of appropriation that are inherent to popular remix culture. I’m taking the opportunity in this paper to reflect on the practice of scholarly quotation itself, before examining some recent creative provocations to the academic ‘author’ situated inventively at the crossroad between scholarly convention and remix culture. Early in his own teaching career at Oxford University Lewis Carroll, wrote to his younger siblings describing the importance of maintaining his dignity as a new tutor. He outlines the distance his college was at pains to maintain between teachers and their students: “otherwise, you know, they are not humble enough”. Carroll playfully describes the set-up of a tutor sitting at his desk, behind closed doors and without access to today’s communication technologies, relying on a series of college ‘scouts’ to convey information down corridors and staircases to the confused student waiting for instruction below. The lectures, according to Carroll, went something like this: Tutor: What is twice three?Scout: What’s a rice-tree?Sub-scout: When is ice free?Sub-sub-scout: What’s a nice fee??Student (timidly): Half a guinea.Sub-sub-scout: Can’t forge any!Sub-scout: Ho for jinny!Scout: Don’t be a ninny!Tutor (looking offended, tries another question): Divide a hundred by twelve.Scout: Provide wonderful bells!Sub-scout: Go ride under it yourself!Sub-sub-scout: Deride the dunderhead elf!Pupil (surprised): What do you mean?Sub-sub-scout: Doings between!Sub-scout: Blue is the screen!Scout: Soup tureen! And so the lecture proceeds… Carroll’s parody of academic miscommunication and misquoting was reproduced by Pierre Bourdieu at the opening of the book Academic Discourse to illustrate the failures of pedagogical practice in higher education in the mid 1960s, when he found scholarly language relied on codes that were “destined to dazzle rather than to enlighten” (3). Bourdieu et al found that students struggled to reproduce appropriately scholarly discourse and were constrained to write in a badly understood and poorly mastered language, finding reassurance in what he called a ‘rhetoric of despair’: “through a kind of incantatory or sacrificial rite, they try to call up and reinstate the tropes, schemas or words which to them distinguish professorial language” (4). The result was bad writing that karaoke-ed a pseudo academic discourse, accompanied by a habit of thoughtlessly patching together other peoples’ words and phrases. Such sloppy quoting activities of course invite the scholarly taboo of plagiarism or its extreme opposite, hypercitation. Elsewhere, Jacques Derrida developed an important theory of citationality and language, but it is intriguing to note his own considerable unease with conventional acknowledgement practices, of quoting and being quoted: I would like to spare you the tedium, the waste of time, and the subservience that always accompany the classic pedagogical procedures of forging links, referring back to past premises or arguments, justifying one’s own trajectory, method, system, and more or less skilful transitions, re-establishing continuity, and so on. These are but some of the imperatives of classical pedagogy with which, to be sure, one can never break once and for all. Yet, if you were to submit to them rigorously, they would very soon reduce you to silence, tautology and tiresome repetition. (The Ear of the Other, 3) This weariness with a procedural hyper-focus on referencing conventions underlines Derrida’s disquiet with the self-protecting, self-promoting and self-justifying practices that bolster pedagogical tradition and yet inhibit real scholarly work, and risk silencing the authorial voice. Today, remix offers new life to quoting. Media theorist Lev Manovich resisted the notion that the practice of ‘quotation’ was the historical precedent for remixing, aligning it instead to the authorship practice of music ‘sampling’ made possible by new electronic and digital technology. Eduardo Navas agrees that sampling is the key element that makes the act of remixing possible, but links its principles not just to music but to the preoccupation with reading and writing as an extended cultural practice beyond textual writing onto all forms of media (8). A crucial point for Navas is that while remix appropriates and reworks its source material, it relies on the practice of citation to work properly: too close to the original means the remix risks being dismissed as derivative, but at the same time the remixer can’t rely on a source always being known or recognised (7). In other words, the conceptual strategies of remix must rely on some form of referencing or citation of the ideas it sources. It is inarguable that advances in digital technologies have expanded the capacity of scholars to search, cut/copy & paste, collate and link to their research sources. New theoretical and methodological frameworks are being developed to take account of these changing conditions of academic work. For instance, Annette Markham proposes a ‘remix methodology’ for qualitative enquiry, arguing that remix is a powerful tool for thinking about an interpretive and adaptive research practice that takes account of the complexity of contemporary cultural contexts. In a similar vein Cheré Harden Blair has used remix as a theoretical framework to grapple with the issue of plagiarism in the postmodern classroom. If, following Roland Barthes, all writing is “a tissue of quotations drawn from innumerable centers of culture” (146), and if all writing is therefore rewriting, then punishing students for plagiarism becomes problematic. Blair argues that since scholarly writing has become a mosaic of digital and textual productions, then teaching must follow suit, especially since teaching, as a dynamic, shifting and intertextual enterprise, is more suited to the digital revolution than traditional, fixed writing (175). She proposes that teachers provide a space in which remixing, appropriation, patch-writing and even piracy could be allowable, even useful and productive: “a space in which the line is blurry not because students are ignorant of what is right or appropriate, or because digital text somehow contains inherent temptations to plagiarise, but because digital media has, in fact, blurred the line” (183). The clashes between remix and scholarly rules of attribution are directly addressed by the pedagogical provocations of conceptual poet Kenneth Goldsmith, who has developed a program of ‘uncreative writing’ at the University of Pennsylvania, where, among other plagiaristic tasks, he forces students to transcribe whole passages from books, or to download essays from online paper mills and defend them as their own, marking down students who show a ‘shred of originality’. In his own writing and performances, which depend almost exclusively on strategies of appropriation, plagiarism and recontextualisation of often banal sources like traffic reports, Goldsmith says that he is working to de-familiarise normative structures of language. For Goldsmith, reframing language into another context allows it to become new again, so that “we don’t need the new sentence, the old sentence re-framed is good enough”. Goldsmith argues for the role of the contemporary academic and creative writer as an intelligent agent in the management of masses of information. He describes his changing perception of his own work: “I used to be an artist, then I became a poet; then a writer. Now when asked, I simply refer to myself as a word processor” (Perloff 147). For him, what is of interest to the twenty-first century is not so much the quote that ‘rips’ or tears words out of their original context, but finding ways to make new ‘wholes’ out of the accumulations, filterings and remixing of existing words and sentences. Another extraordinary example of the blurring of lines between text, author and the discursive peculiarities of digital media can be found in Jonathan Lethem’s essay ‘An Ecstasy of Influence: A Plagiarism’, which first appeared in Harpers Magazine in 2007. While this essay is about the topic of plagiarism, it is itself plagiarized, composed of quotes that have been woven seamlessly together into a composite whole. Although Lethem provides a key at the end with a list of his sources, he has removed in-text citations and quotation marks, even while directly discussing the practices of mis-quotation and mis-attribution throughout the essay itself. Towards the end of the essay can be found the paragraph: Any text is woven entirely with citations, references, echoes, cultural languages, which cut across it through and through in a vast stereophony. The citations that go to make up a text are anonymous, untraceable, and yet already read; they are quotations without inverted commas. The kernel, the soul — let us go further and say the substance, the bulk, the actual and valuable material of all human utterances — is plagiarism. …By necessity, by proclivity, and by delight, we all quote. Neurological study has lately shown that memory, imagination, and consciousness itself is stitched, quilted, pastiched. If we cut-and-paste ourselves, might we not forgive it of our artworks? (68) Overall, Lethem’s self-reflexive pro-plagiarism essay reminds the reader not only of how ideas in literature have been continuously recycled, quoted, appropriated and remixed, but of how open-source cultures are vital for the creation of new works. Lethem (re)produces rather than authors a body of text that is haunted by ever present/absent quotation marks and references. Zara Dinnen suggests that Lethem’s essay, like almost all contemporary texts produced on a computer, is a provocation to once again re-theorise the notion of the author, as not a rigid point of origin but instead “a relay of alternative and composite modes of production” (212), extending Manovich’s notion of the role of author in the digital age of being perhaps closest to that of a DJ. But Lethem’s essay, however surprising and masterfully intertextual, was produced and disseminated as a linear ‘static’ text. On the other hand, Mark Amerika’s remixthebook project first started out as a series of theoretical performances on his Professor VJ blog and was then extended into a multitrack composition of “applied remixology” that features sampled phrases and ideas from a range of artistic, literary, musical, theoretical and philosophical sources. Wanting his project to be received not as a book but as a hybridised publication and performance art project that appears in both print and digital forms, remixthebook was simultaneously published in a prestigious university press and a website that works as an online hub and teaching tool to test out the theories. In this way, Amerika expands the concept of writing to include multimedia forms composed for both networked environments and also experiments with what he terms “creative risk management” where the artist, also a scholar and a teacher, is “willing to drop all intellectual pretence and turn his theoretical agenda into (a) speculative play” (xi). He explains his process halfway through the print book: Other times we who create innovative works of remix artare fully self-conscious of the rival lineagewe spring forth fromand knowingly take on other remixological styles just to seewhat happens when we move insideother writers’ bodies (of work)This is when remixologically inhabitingthe spirit of another writer’s stylistic tendenciesor at least the subconsciously imagined writerly gesturesthat illuminate his or her live spontaneous performancefeels more like an embodied praxis In some ways this all seems so obvious to me:I mean what is a writer anyway buta simultaneous and continuous fusion ofremixologically inhabited bodies of work? (109) Amerika mashes up the jargon of academic writing with avant-pop forms of digital rhetoric in order to “move inside other writers’ bodies (of work)” in order to test out his theoretical agenda in an “embodied praxis” at the same time that he shakes up the way that contemporary scholarship itself is performed. The remixthebook project inevitably recalls one of the great early-twentieth century plays with scholarly quotation, Walter Benjamin’s The Arcades Project. Instead of avoiding conventional quoting, footnoting and referencing, these are the very fabric of Benjamin’s sprawling project, composed entirely of quotes drawn from nineteenth century philosophy and literature. This early scholarly ‘remixing’ project has been described as bewildering and oppressive, but which others still find relevant and inspirational. Marjorie Perloff, for instance, finds the ‘passages’ in Benjamin’s arcades have “become the digital passages we take through websites and YouTube videos, navigating our way from one Google link to another and over the bridges provided by our favourite search engines and web pages" (49). For Benjamin, the process of collecting quotes was addictive. Hannah Arendt describes his habit of carrying little black notebooks in which "he tirelessly entered in the form of quotations what daily living and reading netted him in the way of 'pearls' and 'coral'. On occasion he read from them aloud, showed them around like items from a choice and precious collection" (45). A similar practice of everyday hypercitation can be found in the contemporary Australian performance artist Danielle Freakley’s project, The Quote Generator. For what was intended in 2006 to be a three year project, but which is still ongoing, Freakley takes the delirious pleasure of finding and fitting the perfect quote to fit an occasion to an extreme. Unlike Benjamin, Freakley didn’t collect and collate quotes, she then relied on them to navigate her way through her daily interactions. As The Quote Generator, Freakley spoke only in quotations drawn from film, literature and popular culture, immediately following each quote with its correct in-text reference, familiar to academic writers as the ‘author/date’ citation system. The awkwardness and seeming artificiality of even short exchanges with someone who responds only in quotes might be bewildering enough, but the inclusion of the citation after the quote maddeningly interrupts and, at the same time, adds another metalevel to a conversation where even the simple platitude ‘thank you’ might be followed by an attribution to ‘Deep Throat 1972’. Longer exchanges become increasingly overwhelming, as Freakley’s piling of quote on quote, and sometimes repeating quotes, demands an attentive listener, as is evident in a 2008 interview with Andrew Denton on the ABC’s Enough Rope: Andrew Denton’s Enough Rope (2008) Denton: So, you’ve been doing this for three years??Freakley: Yes, Optus 1991Denton: How do people respond to you speaking in such an unnatural way?Freakley: It changes, David Bowie 1991. On the streets AKA Breakdance 1984, most people that I know think that I am crazy, Billy Thorpe 1972, a nigger like me is going insane, Cyprus Hill 1979, making as much sense as a Japanese instruction manual, Red Dwarf 1993. Video documentation of Freakley’s encounters with unsuspecting members of the public reveal how frustrating the inclusion of ‘spoken’ references can be, let alone how taken aback people are on realising they never get Freakley’s own words, but are instead receiving layers of quotations. The frustration can quickly turn hostile (Denton at one point tells Freakley to “shut up”) or can prove contaminatory, as people attempt to match or one-up her quotes (see Cook's interview 8). Apparently, when Freakley continued her commitment to the performance at a Perth Centerlink, the staff sent her to a psychiatrist and she was diagnosed with an obsessive-compulsive disorder, then prescribed medication (Schwartzkoff 4). While Benjamin's The Arcades Project invites the reader to scroll through its pages as a kind of textual flaneur, Freakley herself becomes a walking and talking word processor, extending the possibilities of Amerika’s “embodied praxis” in an inescapable remix of other people’s words and phrases. At the beginning of the project, Freakley organised a card collection of quotes categorised into possible conversation topics, and devised a ‘harness’ for easy access. Image: Danielle Freakley’s The Quote Generator harness Eventually, however, Freakley was able to rely on her own memory of an astounding number of quotations, becoming a “near mechanical vessel” (Gottlieb 2009), or, according to her own manifesto, a “regurgitation library to live by”: The Quote Generator reads, and researches as it speaks. The Quote Generator is both the reader and composer/editor. The Quote Generator is not an actor spouting lines on a stage. The Quote Generator assimilates others lines into everyday social life … The Quote Generator, tries to find its own voice, an understanding through throbbing collations of others, constantly gluttonously referencing. Much academic writing quotes/references ravenously. New things cannot be said without constant referral, acknowledgement to what has been already, the intricate detective work in the barking of the academic dog. By her unrelenting appropriation and regurgitating of quotations, Freakley uses sampling as a technique for an extended performance that draws attention to the remixology of everyday life. By replacing conversation with a hyper-insistence on quotes and their simultaneous citation, she draws attention to the artificiality and inescapability of the ‘codes’ that make up not just ordinary conversations, but also conventional academic discourse, what she calls the “barking of the academic dog”. Freakley’s performance has pushed the scholarly conventions of quoting and referencing to their furthest extreme, in what has been described by Daine Singer as a kind of “endurance art” that relies, in large part, on an antagonistic relationship to its audience. In his now legendary 1969 “Double Session” seminar, Derrida, too, experimented with the pedagogical performance of the (re)producing author, teasing his earnest academic audience. It is reported that the seminar began in a dimly lit room lined with blackboards covered with quotations that Derrida, for a while, simply “pointed to in silence” (177). In this seminar, Derrida put into play notions that can be understood to inform remix practices just as much as they do deconstruction: the author, originality, mimesis, imitation, representation and reference. Scholarly conventions, perhaps particularly the quotation practices that insist on the circulation of rigid codes of attribution, and are defended by increasingly out-of-date understandings of contemporary research, writing and teaching practices, are ripe to be played with. Remix offers an expanded discursive framework to do this in creative and entertaining ways. References Amerika, Mark. remixthebook. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2011. 29 July 2013 http://www.remixthebook.com/. Arendt, Hannah. “Walter Benjamin: 1892-1940.” In Illuminations. New York, NY: Shocken, 1969: 1-55. Barthes, Roland. “The Death of the Author.” Image Music Text. Trans Stephen Heath. New York: Hill and Wang, 1977: 142-148. Benjamin, Walter. The Arcades Project. Ed. Rolf Tiedemann, trans. Howard Eiland & Kevin McLaughlin. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1999. Blaire, Cheré Harden. “Panic and Plagiarism: Authorship and Academic Dishonesty in a Remix Culture.” Media Tropes 2.1 (2009): 159-192. Bourdieu, Pierre, Jean-Claude Passeron, and Monique de Saint Martin. Academic Discourse: Linguistic Misunderstanding and Professorial Power. Trans. Richard Teese. Stanford California: Stanford University Press, 1965. Carroll, Lewis (Charles Dodgson). “Letter to Henrietta and Edwin Dodgson 31 Jan 1855”. 15 July 2013 http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Letters_of_Lewis_Carroll. Cook, Richard. “Don’t Quote Me on That.” Time Out Sydney (2008): 8. http://rgcooke.wordpress.com/2008/02/13/interview-danielle-freakley.Denton, Andrew. “Interview: The Quote Generator.” Enough Rope. 29 Feb. 2008. ABC TV. 15 July 2013 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AsrGvwXsenE. Derrida, Jacques. Spurs, Nietzsche’s Styles. Trans. Barbara Harlow. London: University of Chicago Press, 1978. Derrida, Jacques. The Ear of the Other: Otobiography, Text, Transference. Trans Peggy Kampf. New York: Shocken Books, 1985. Derrida, Jacques. “The Double Session”. Dissemination. Trans Alan Bass, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1981. Dinnen, Zara. "In the Mix: The Potential Convergence of Literature and New Media in Jonathan Letham's 'The Ecstasy of Influence'". Journal of Narrative Theory 42.2 (2012). Freakley, Danielle. The Quote Generator. 2006 to present. 10 July 2013 http://www.thequotegenerator.com/. Goldsmith, Kenneth. Uncreative Writing. New York: University of Colombia Press 2011. Gottlieb, Benjamin. "You Shall Worship No Other Artist God." Art & Culture (2009). 15 July 2013 http://www.artandculture.com/feature/999. Lethem, Jonathan. “The Ecstasy of Influence: A Plagiarism.” Harper’s Magazine, Feb. 2007: 59-71. http://harpers.org/archive/2007/02/the-ecstasy-of-influence/. Manovich, Lev. "What Comes after Remix?" 2007. 15 July 2013 http://manovich.net/LNM/index.html. Markham, Annette. “Remix Methodology.” 2013. 9 July 2013 http://www.markham.internetinquiry.org/category/remix/.Morris, Simon (dir.). Sucking on Words: Kenneth Goldsmith. 2007. http://www.ubu.com/film/goldsmith_sucking.html.Navas, Eduardo. Remix Theory: The Aesthetics of Sampling. New York: Springer Wein, 2012. Perloff, Marjorie. Unoriginal Genius: Poetry by Other Means in the New Century. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010. Schwartzkoff, Louise. “Art Forms Spring into Life at Prima Vera.” Sydney Morning Herald 19 Sep. 2008: Entertainment, 4. http://www.smh.com.au/news/entertainment/arts/art-forms-spring-into-life-at-primavera/2008/09/18/1221331045404.html.Singer, Daine (cur.). “Pains in the Artists: Endurance and Suffering.” Blindside Exhibition. 2007. 2 June 2013 http://www.blindside.org.au/2007/pains-in-the-artists.shtml.

IntroductionThe role, function, and future of the Western public intellectual have been highly contested over the last three decades. The dominant discourse, which predicts the decline of the public intellectual, asserts the institutionalisation of their labour has eroded their authority to speak publicly to power on behalf of others; and that the commodification of intellectual performance has transformed them from sages, philosophers, and men of letters into trivial media entertainers, pundits, and ideologues. Overwhelmingly the crisis debates link the demise of the public intellectual to shifts in public culture, which was initially conceptualised as a literary and artistic space designed to liberate the awareness of citizens through critique and to reflect upon “the chronic and persistent issues of life, meaning and representation” (McGuigan 430). This early imagining of public culture as an exclusively civilising space, however, did not last and Jurgen Habermas documented its decline in response to the commodification and politicisation of culture in the 20th century. Yet, as social activism continued to flourish in the public sphere, Habermas re-theorised public culture as a more pluralistic site which simultaneously accommodates “uncritical populism, radical subversion and critical intervention” (436) and operates as both a marketplace and a “site of communicative rationality, mutual respect and understanding (McGuigan 434). The rise of creative industries expanded popular engagement with public culture but destabilised the authority of the public intellectual. The accompanying shifts also affected the function of the curator, who, like the intellectual, had a role in legislating and arbitrating knowledge, and negotiating and authorising meaning through curated exhibitions of objects deemed sacred and significant. Jennifer Barrett noted the similarities in the two functions when she argued in Museums and the Public Sphere that, because museums have an intellectual role in society, curators have a public intellectual function as they define publics, determine modes of engagement, and shape knowledge formation (150). The resemblance between the idealised role of the intellectual and the curator in enabling the critique that emancipates the citizen means that both functions have been affected by the atomisation of contemporary society, which has exposed the power effects of the imposed coherency of authoritative and universal narratives. Indeed, just as Russell Jacoby, Allan Bloom, and Richard Posner predicted the death of the intellectual, who could no longer claim to speak in universal terms on behalf of others, so museums faced their own crisis of relevancy. Declining visitor numbers and reduced funding saw museums reinvent themselves, and in moving away from their traditional exclusive, authoritative, and nation building roles—which Pierre Bourdieu argued reproduced the “existing class-based culture, education and social systems” (Barrett 3)—museums transformed themselves into inclusive and diverse sites of co-creation with audiences and communities. In the context of this change the curator ceased to be the “primary producer of knowledge” (Barrett 13) and emerged to reproduce “contemporary culture preoccupations” and constitute the “social imagery” of communities (119). The modern museum remains concerned with explaining and interrogating the world, but the shift in curatorial work is away from the objects themselves to a focus upon audiences and how they value the artefacts, knowledge, and experiences of collective shared memory. The change in curatorial practices was driven by what Peter Vergo called a new “museology” (Barrett 2), and according to Macdonald this term assumes that “object meanings are contextual rather than inherent” or absolute and universal (2). Public intellectuals and curators, as the custodians of ideas and narratives in the contemporary cultural industries, privilege audience reception and recognise that consumers and/or citizens engage with public culture for a variety of reasons, including critique, understanding, and entertainment. Curators, like public intellectuals, also recognise that they can no longer assume the knowledge and experience of their audience, nor prescribe the nature of engagement with ideas and objects. Instead, curators and intellectuals emerge as negotiators and translators of cultural meaning as they traverse the divides in public culture, sequestering ideas and cultural artefacts and constructing narratives that engage audiences and communities in the process of re-imagining the past as a way of providing new insights into contemporary challenges.Methodology In exploring the idea that the public intellectual acts as a curator of ideas as he or she defines and privileges the discursive spaces of public culture, this paper begins by providing an overview of the cultural context of the contemporary public intellectual which enables comparisons between intellectual and curatorial functions. Second, this paper analyses a random sample of the content of books, newspaper and magazine articles, speeches, and transcripts of interviews drawn from The Australian, The Age, The Sydney Morning Herald, The Sydney Institute, the ABC, The Monthly, and Quadrant published or broadcast between 1996 and 2007, in order to identify the key themes of the History Wars. It should be noted that the History War debates were extensive, persistent, and complex—and as they unfolded over a 13-year period they emerged as the “most powerful” and “most disputed form of public intellectual work” (Carter, Ideas 9). Many issues were aggregated under the trope of the History Wars, and these topics were subject to both popular commentary and academic investigation. Furthermore, the History Wars discourse was produced in a range of mediums including popular media sources, newspaper and magazine columns, broadcasts, blogs, lectures, and writers’ forums and publications. Given the extent of this discourse, the sample of articles which provides the basis for this analysis does not seek to comprehensively survey the literature on the History Wars. Rather this paper draws upon Foucault’s genealogical qualitative method, which exposes the subordinated discontinuities in texts, to 1) consider the political context of the History War trope; and 2) identify how intellectuals discursively exhibited versions of the nation’s identity and in the process made visible the power effects of the past. Public Intellectuals The underlying fear of the debates about the public intellectual crisis was that the public intellectual would no longer be able to act as the conscience of a nation, speak truth to power, or foster the independent and dissenting public debate that guides and informs individual human agency—a goal that has lain at the heart of the Western intellectual’s endeavours since Kant’s Sapere aude. The late 20th century crisis discourse, however, primarily mourned the decline of a particular form of public authority attached to the heroic universal intellectual formation made popular by Emile Zola at the end of the 19th century, and which claimed the power to hold the political elites of France accountable. Yet talk of an intellectual crisis also became progressively associated with a variety of general concerns about globalising society. Some of these concerns included fears that structural shifts in the public domain would lead to the impoverishment of the cultural domain, the end of Western civilisation, the decline of the progressive political left, and the end of universal values. It was also expected that the decline in intellectuals would also enable the rise of populism, political conservatism, and anti-intellectualism (Jacoby Bloom; Bauman; Rorty; Posner; Furedi; Marquand). As a result of these fears, the function of the intellectual who engages publicly was re-theorised. Zygmunt Bauman suggested the intellectual was no longer the legislator or arbiter of taste but the negotiator and translator of ideas; Michel Foucault argued that the intellectual could be institutionally situated and still speak truth to power; and Edward Said insisted the public intellectual had a role in opening up possibilities to resolve conflict by re-imagining the past. In contrast, the Australian public intellectual has never been declared in crisis or dead, and this is probably because the nation does not have the same legacy of the heroic public intellectual. Indeed, as a former British colony labelled the “working man’s paradise” (White 4), Australia’s intellectual work was produced in “institutionalised networks” (Head 5) like universities and knowledge disciplines, political parties, magazines, and unions. Within these networks there was a double division of labour, between the abstraction of knowledge and its compartmentalisation, and between the practical application of knowledge and its popularisation. As a result of this legacy, a more organic, specific, and institutionalised form of intellectualism emerged, which, according to Head, limited intellectual influence and visibility across other networks and domains of knowledge and historically impeded general intellectual engagement with the public. Fears about the health and authority of the public intellectual in Australia have therefore tended to be produced as a part of Antonio Gramsci’s ideological “wars of position” (Mouffe 5), which are an endless struggle between cultural and political elites for control of the institutions of social reproduction. These struggles began in Australia in the 1970s and 1980s over language and political correctness, and they reappeared in the 1990s as the History Wars. History Wars“The History Wars” was a term applied to an ideological battle between two visions of the Australian nation. The first vision was circulated by Australian Labor Party Prime Minister Paul Keating, who saw race relations as central to 21st century global Australia and began the process of dealing with the complex and divisive Indigenous issues at home. He established the Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation in 1991; acknowledged in the 1992 Redfern speech that white settlers were responsible for the problems in Indigenous communities; and commissioned the Bringing Them Home report, which was completed in 1997 and concluded that the mandated removal of Indigenous children from their families and communities throughout the 20th century had violated their human rights and caused long-term and systemic damage to Indigenous communities.The second vision of Australia was circulated by Liberal Prime Minister John Howard, who, after he came to power in 1996, began his own culture war to reconstruct a more conservative vision of the nation. Howard believed that the stories of Indigenous dispossession undermined confidence in the nation, and he sought to produce a historical view of the past grounded in “Judeo-Christian ethics, the progressive spirit of the enlightenment and the institutions and values of British culture” (“Sense of Balance”). Howard called for a return to a narrative form that valorised Australia’s achievements, and he sought to instil a more homogenised view of the past and a coherent national identity by reviewing high school history programs, national museum appointments, and citizenship tests. These two political positions framed the subsequent intellectual struggles over the past. While a number of issues were implicated in the battle, generally, left commentators used the History Wars as a way to circulate certain ideas about morality and identity, including 1) Australians needed to make amends for past injustices to Indigenous Australians and 2) the nation’s global identity was linked to how they dealt with Australia’s first people. In contrast, the political right argued 1) the left had misrepresented and overstated the damage done to Indigenous communities and rewritten history; 2) stories about Indigenous abuse were fragmenting the nation’s identity at a time when the nation needed to build a coherent global presence; and 3) no apology was necessary, because contemporary Australians did not feel responsible for past injustices. AnalysisThe war between these two visions of Australia was fought in “extra-curricular sites,” according to Stuart Macintyre, and this included newspaper columns, writers’ festivals, broadcast interviews, intellectual magazines like The Monthly and Quadrant, books, and think tank lectures. Academics and intellectuals were the primary protagonists, and they disputed the extent of colonial genocide; the legitimacy of Indigenous land rights; the impact of the Stolen Generation on the lives of modern Indigenous citizens; and the necessity of a formal apology as a part of the reconciliation process. The conflicts also ignited debates about the nature of history, the quality of public debates in Australia, and exposed the tensions between academics, public intellectuals, newspaper commentators and political elites. Much of the controversy played out in the national forums can be linked to the Bringing Them Home: National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families report Stolen Generation inquiry and report, which was commissioned by Keating but released after Howard came to office. Australian public intellectual and professor of politics Robert Manne critiqued the right’s response to the report in his 2001 Quarterly Essay titled “In Denial: The Stolen Generation and The Right”. He argued that there was a right-wing campaign in Australia that sought to diminish and undermine justice for Aboriginal people by discounting the results of the inquiry, underestimating the numbers of those affected, and underfunding the report’s recommendations. He spoke of the nation’s shame and in doing so he challenged Australia’s image of itself. Manne’s position was applauded by many for providing what Kay Schaffer in her Australian Humanities Review paper called an “effective antidote to counter the bitter stream of vitriol that followed the release of the Bringing Them Home report”. Yet Manne also drew criticism. Historian Bain Attwood argued that Manne’s attack on conservatives was polemical, and he suggested that it would be more useful to consider in detail what drives the right-wing analysis of Indigenous issues. Attwood also suggested that Manne’s essay had misrepresented the origins of the narrative of the Stolen Generation, which had been widely known prior to the release of the Stolen Generation report.Conservative commentators focused upon challenging the accuracy of those stories submitted to the inquiry, which provided the basis for the report. This struggle over factual details was to characterise the approach of historian Keith Windschuttle, who rejected both the numbers of those stolen from their families and the degree of violence used in the settlement of Australia. In his 2002 book The Fabrication of Aboriginal History, Volume One, Van Diemen’s Land 1803–1847 he accused left-wing academics of exaggerating the events of Aboriginal history in order to further their own political agenda. In particular, he argued that the extent of the “conflagration of oppression and conflict” which sought to “dispossess, degrade, and devastate the Aboriginal people” had been overstated and misrepresented and designed to “create an edifice of black victimhood and white guilt” (Windschuttle, Fabrication 1). Manne responded to Windschuttle’s allegations in Whitewash: On Keith Windschuttle’s Fabrication of Aboriginal History, arguing that Windschuttle arguments were “unpersuasive and unsupported either by independent research or even familiarity with the relevant secondary historical literature” (7) and that the book added nothing to the debates. Other academics like Stephen Muecke, Marcia Langton and Heather Goodall expressed concerns about Windschuttle’s work, and in 2003 historians Stuart Macintyre and Anna Clark published The History Wars, which described the implications of the politicisation of history on the study of the past. At the same time, historian Bain Attwood in Telling the Truth About Aboriginal History argued that the contestation over history was eroding the “integrity of intellectual life in Australia” (2). Fractures also broke out between writers and historians about who was best placed to write history. The Australian book reviewer Stella Clarke wrote that the History Wars were no longer constructive discussions, and she suggested that historical novelists could colonise the territory traditionally dominated by professional historians. Inga Clendinnen wasn’t so sure. She wrote in a 2006 Quarterly Essay entitled “The History Question: Who Owns the Past?” that, while novelists could get inside events through a process of “applied empathy,” imagination could in fact obstruct the truth of reality (20). Discussion The History Wars saw academics engage publicly to exhibit a set of competing ideas about Australia’s identity in the nation’s media and associated cultural sites, and while the debates initially prompted interest they eventually came to be described as violent and unproductive public conversations about historical details and ideological positions. Indeed, just as the museum curator could no longer authoritatively prescribe the cultural meaning of artefacts, so the History Wars showed that public intellectuals could not adjudicate the identity of the nation nor prescribe the nature of its conduct. For left-wing public intellectuals and commentators, the History Wars came to signify the further marginalisation of progressive politics in the face of the dominant, conservative, and increasingly populist constituency. Fundamentally, the battles over the past reinforced fears that Australia’s public culture was becoming less diverse, less open, and less able to protect traditional civil rights, democratic freedoms, and social values. Importantly for intellectuals like Robert Manne, there was a sense that Australian society was less able or willing to reflect upon the moral legitimacy of its past actions as a part of the process of considering its contemporary identity. In contrast right-wing intellectuals and commentators argued that the History Wars showed how public debate under a conservative government had been liberated from political correctness and had become more vibrant. This was the position of Australian columnist Janet Albrechtsen who argued that rather than a decline in public debate there had been, in fact, “vigorous debate of issues that were once banished from the national conversation” (91). She went on to insist that left-wing commentators’ concerns about public debate were simply a mask for their discomfort at having their views and ideas challenged. There is no doubt that the History Wars, while media-orchestrated debates that circulated a set of ideological positions designed to primarily attract audiences and construct particular views of Australia, also raised public awareness of the complex issues associated with Australia’s Indigenous past. Indeed, the Wars ended what W.E.H Stanner had called the “great silence” on Indigenous issues and paved the way for Kevin Rudd’s apology to Indigenous people for their “profound grief, suffering and loss”. The Wars prompted conversations across the nation about what it means to be Australian and exposed the way history is deeply implicated in power surely a goal of both intellectual debate and curated exhibitions. ConclusionThis paper has argued that the public intellectual can operate like a curator in his or her efforts to preserve particular ideas, interpretations, and narratives of public culture. The analysis of the History Wars debates, however, showed that intellectuals—just like curators —are no longer authorities and adjudicators of the nation’s character, identity, and future but cultural intermediaries whose function is not just the performance or exhibition of selected ideas, objects, and narratives but also the engagement and translation of other voices across different contexts in the ongoing negotiation of what constitutes cultural significance. ReferencesAlbrechtsen, Janet. “The History Wars.” The Sydney Papers (Winter/Spring 2003): 84–92. Attwood, Bain. Telling the Truth about Aboriginal History. Sydney: Allen & Unwin, 2005.Bauman, Zygmunt. Legislators and Interpreters: On Modernity, Post Modernity and Intellectuals. Cambridge, CAMBS: Polity, 1987. Barrett, Jennifer. Museums and the Public Sphere. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 2010. Bloom, Allan. Closing of the American Mind. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1987.Bourdieu. P. Distinctions: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Trans. R. Nice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 1984. Bringing Them Home: National Inquiry into the Separation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Children from Their Families. Commonwealth of Australia. 1997.Carter, David. Introduction. The Ideas Market: An Alternative Take on Australia’s Intellectual Life. Ed. David Carter. Melbourne: Melbourne UP, 2004. 1–11.Clendinnen, Inga. True Stories. Sydney: ABC Books, 1999.Clendinnen, Inga. “The History Question: Who Owns the Past?” Quarterly Essay 23 (2006): 1–82. Foucault, Michel, and Giles Deleuze. Intellectuals and Power Language, Counter Memory and Practice: Selected Essays and Interviews. Ed. and trans. David Bouchard. New York: Cornell UP, 1977. Gratton, Michelle. “Howard Claims Victory in National Culture Wars.” The Age 26 Jan. 2006. 6 Aug. 2015 ‹http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/pm-claims-victory-in-culture-wars/2006/01/25/1138066861163.html›.Head, Brian. “Introduction: Intellectuals in Australian Society.” Intellectual Movements and Australian Society. Eds. Brian Head and James Waller. Melbourne: Oxford UP, 1988. 1–44.Hohendahl, Peter Uwe, and Marc Silberman. “Critical Theory, Public Sphere and Culture: Jürgen Habermas and His Critics.” New German Critique 16 (Winter 1979): 89–118.Howard, John. “A Sense of Balance: The Australian Achievement in 2006.” National Press Club. Great Parliament House, Canberra, ACT. 25 Jan. 2006. ‹http://pmtranscripts.dpmc.gov.au/browse.php?did=22110›.Howard, John. “Standard Bearer in Liberal Culture.” Address on the 50th Anniversary of Quadrant, Sydney, 3 Oct. 2006. The Australian 4 Oct. 2006. 6 Aug. 2015 ‹http://www.theaustralian.com.au/opinion/john-howard-standard-bearer-in-liberal-culture/story-e6frg6zo-1111112306534›.Jacoby, Russell. The Last Intellectuals: American Culture in the Age of Academe. New York: The Noonday Press, 1987.Keating, Paul. “Keating’s History Wars.” Sydney Morning Herald 5 Sep. 2003. 6 Aug. 2015 ‹http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/09/05/1062549021882.html›.Macdonald, S. “Expanding Museum Studies: An Introduction.” Ed. S. Macdonald. A Companion to Museum Studies. Oxford and Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2006. 1–12. Macintyre, Stuart, and Anna Clarke. The History Wars. Melbourne: Melbourne UP, 2003. ———. “The History Wars.” The Sydney Papers (Winter/Spring 2003): 77–83.———. “Who Plays Stalin in Our History Wars? Sydney Morning Herald 17 Sep. 2003. 6 Aug. 2015 ‹http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/09/16/1063625030438.html›.Manne, Robert. “In Denial: The Stolen Generation and the Right.” Quarterly Essay 1 (2001).———. WhiteWash: On Keith Windshuttle’s Fabrication of Aboriginal History. Melbourne. Black Ink, 2003.Mark, David. “PM Calls for End to the History Wars.” ABC News 28 Aug. 2009.McGuigan, Jim. “The Cultural Public Sphere.” European Journal of Cultural Studies 8.4 (2005): 427–43.Mouffe, Chantal, ed. Gramsci and Marxist Theory. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1979. Melleuish, Gregory. The Power of Ideas: Essays on Australian Politics and History. Melbourne: Australian Scholarly Publishing, 2009.Rudd, Kevin. “Full Transcript of PM’s Apology Speech.” The Australian 13 Feb. 2008. 6 Aug. 2015 ‹http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/full-transcript-of-pms-speech/story-e6frg6nf-1111115543192›.Said, Edward. “The Public Role of Writers and Intellectuals.” ABC Alfred Deakin Lectures, Melbourne Town Hall, 19 May 2001. Schaffer, Kay. “Manne’s Generation: White Nation Responses to the Stolen Generation Report.” Australian Humanities Review (June 2001). 5 June 2015 ‹http://www.australianhumanitiesreview.org/archive/Issue-June-2001/schaffer.html›. Shanahan, Dennis. “Howard Rallies the Right in Cultural War Assault.” The Australian 4 Oct. 2006. 6 Aug. 2015 ‹http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/howard-rallies-right-in-culture-war-assault/story-e6frg6nf-1111112308221›.Wark, Mackenzie. “Lip Service.” The Ideas Market: An Alternative Take on Australia’s Intellectual Life. Ed. David Carter. Carlton, VIC: Melbourne UP, 2004. 259–69.White, Richard. Inventing Australia Images and Identity 1688–1980. Sydney: George Allen and Unwin, 1981. Windschuttle, Keith. The Fabrication of Australian History, Volume One: Van Diemen’s Land 1803–1847. Sydney: McCleay, 2002. ———. “Why There Was No Stolen Generation (Part One).” Quadrant Online (Jan–Feb 2010). 6 Aug. 2015 ‹https://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2010/01-02/why-there-were-no-stolen-generations/›.

In presplit blasting operations airborne energy called air blast overpressure or impulsive sound is produced. The air blast induced by blasting may vary significantly at or around an open pit mine depending on several parameters such as the amount of charge detonated, the physical distance between the blast and the monitoring locations and the weather conditions. Therefore evaluation and assessment of noise condition at or around an open pit mine is necessary. The objective of this research study is to monitor and record the noise and to investigate and assess the noise conditions that will be induced from presplit blasting operations at Kisladag Gold Mine. In this research study, several parameters such as the amount of charge, the physical distance to the location of monitoring device or residential structures and the weather condition parameters such as wind direction, wind speed were recorded, analyzed and evaluated. It is observed that with increasing charge per delay air overpressure increases, whereas with increasing scaled distances it decreases. It is also understood that wind speed and the direction are effective in air overpressure propagation also, but this subject needs further investigation. It is concluded that according to the U.S. regulations there is no damage risk to the structures and no disturbance to the inhabitants at present. Due to the uncertainties in weather conditions, in order not to take any risks, the charge amount per delay should be kept at 35 kg or less for presplit blasting at the mine.

In this thesis 10x10 reconfigurable reflectarray is designed at 26.5 GHz where the change in the progressive phase shift between elements is obtained with RF MEMS switches in the transmission lines of unit elements composed of aperture coupled microstrip patch antenna (ACMPA). The reflectarray is illuminated by a horn antenna, and the reflected beam is designed to switch between broadside and 40°
by considering the position of the horn antenna with respect to the reflectarray. In the design, the transmission line analysis is applied for matching the ACMPA to the free space. The full wave simulation techniques in HFSS are discussed to obtain the phase design curve which is used in determining two sets of transmission line lengths for each element, one for the broadside and the other for switching to the 40°
at 26.5 GHz. The switching between two sets of transmission line lengths is sustained by inserting RF MEMS switches into the transmission lines in each element. Two types of RF MEMS switches, series and shunt configurations, are designed for the switching purpose in the reflectarray. The phase errors due to nonideal phase design curve and type of the RF MEMS switch are reduced. The possible mutual coupling effects of the bias lines used to actuate the RF MEMS switches are also eliminated by the proper design. To show the validity of the design procedure, a prototype of 20x20 reflectarray composed of ACMPA elements is designed at 25GHz and produced using Printed Circuit Board (PCB) technology. The measurement results of the prototype reflectarray show that the main beam can be directed to the 40°
as desired. The process flow for the production of the reconfigurable reflectarray is suggested in terms of integration of the wafer bonding step with the in-house standard surface micromachined RF MEMS process.

This thesis focuses on late Early Bronze Age metal objects from funeral context from the site Kalinkaya-Toptastepe, dated to the late 4th and 3rd millennium BCE. The site yielded a large number of metal objects from EBA necropolis of the southern slope of Toptastepe, offering an ideal closed assemblage for an archaeometrical analysis to reveal the metalworking technologies of an early small rural community of Central Anatolia. First archaeometrical analysis applied on these objects, however, revealed unexpectedly high amounts of Zinc, which turned out to be not an intentional alloy, but modern contamination due to the electrochemical cleaning, carried out in the 1970s. A second analysis has carried out after cleaning the metal objects with micro-sandblasting technique, to remove the artificial Zn contamination. The accumulated data provided us with important insights into the metal consumption and alloying traditions of a late EBA village community in Central Anatolia, showing the earliest conscious alloys were being applied in small hamlets of the EBA as well. It has been apparent that any pre-Iron Age metal object, revealing Zn in its chemical composition can not be considered as early brass, but clearly a result of modern, ill-advised cleaning application.

Endo-b-1,4 xylanases (EC. 3.2.1.8) are typically produced as a mixture of different hydrolytic enzymes such as b-1,4-xylosidase (EC. 3.2.1.37) , a-Larabinofuranosidases (EC. 3.2.1.55), and feruloyl esterase (EC 3.1.1.73) that hydrolyze xylan molecule, which constitutes 20-30% of the weight of wood and agricultural wastes. Thus, xylan, a renewable biomass, can be utilized as a substrate for the preparation of many products such as fuels, solvents and pharmaceuticals. Besides, xylanolytic enzymes themselves are also used in food,feed, textile industries and pre-bleaching of kraft. In the first part of the study, xylanolytic systems of a soil isolate Bacillus pumilus SB-M13 and a thermophilic fungus Scytalidium thermophilum were investigated. Production rate and type of xylanolytic changed depending on the carbon source and the microorganism. However, xylanolytic enzyme production was found to be sequential, in synergy and under the control of carbon catabolite repression for both microorganisms. In the second part, B. pumilus SB-M13 b-1,4 xylanase was purified and biochemically characterized. The enzyme was stable at alkaline pHs and highest activity was observed at 60°
C and pH 7.5. Enzyme Km and kcat values were determined as 1.87 mg/ml and 43,000 U/mg, respectively. B. pumilus SB-M13 and S .thermophilum a-L-arabinofuranosidases were also purified and biochemically characterized. Although produced from a mesophilic microorganism, B. pumilus SB-M13 arabinofuranosidase was quite thermostable. Moreover, unlike other fungi, S. thermophilum produced alkaline stable arabinofuranosidases. Both enzymes were multimeric, alkaline stable and most active at 70°
C and pH 7.0. However, when compared to S. thermophilum, catalytic power of B. pumilus SB-M13 arabinofuranosidase was higher.

In this study, hazardous waste inventory for Turkey is developed based on wastes identified as hazardous in European Waste Catalogue and Regulation on Control of Hazardous Wastes, Annex 7 Necessity of such inventory arises from importance of acquiring information on the amount of hazardous wastes generated and on their countrywide distribution for a sound hazardous waste management system for Turkey. Hazardous waste inventory is constructed by using waste generation factors obtained from literature which are coefficients that relate production with environmental emissions. Whenever possible, direct information obtained from generators was utilized. Both absolute and minor entries are covered. It is estimated that 4,940,000 &ndash
5,110,000 t/yr of hazardous wastes are being generated in Turkey. 1,790,000 &ndash
2,252,000 t/yr of these are classified as absolute entries and 3,146,000 &ndash
3,160,000 t/yr of hazardous wastes are minor entries. It is observed that highest generation occurs from mining and thermal processes which involve high amounts of minor entries. Beside these industries highest generation occurs from wood preservation. Per capita hazardous waste generation is estimated as 30 &ndash
77 kg/capita/yr which is in accordance with per capita generation range of EU. Highest hazardous waste generation occurs from Marmara Region with 527,730 t/yr followed by Aegean (524,580 t/yr), Central Anatolia (481,820 t/yr), Black Sea Region (277,850 t/yr), Mediterranean (211,580 t/yr), Southeast Anatolia (58,290 t/yr) and Eastern Anatolia (36,520 t/yr) excluding minor entries from mining industry and thermal processes. The trends in hazardous waste generation and GDP from manufacturing industry show the same trend. Contribution of regions are in the same order both in hazardous waste generation and GDP.

Orientador: Marcius Cesar Soares Freire
Dissertação (mestrado) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Instituto de Artes
Made available in DSpace on 2018-08-12T14:55:04Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Cencig_JavierEsteban_M.pdf: 1461447 bytes, checksum: 3545a0e179701ca75e3a1d92e32cfe9b (MD5) Previous issue date: 2008
Resumo: Este trabalho tem como objetivo identificar estratégias do discurso no domínio documentário ou não ficcional a partir da análise de três filmes de diferentes épocas e suas particularidades metodológicas, abordando a formação histórica que os envolve. O principal critério para a escolha dos filmes, além do grande apreço que lhes tenho, foi o fato de terem como tema condições de vida em cenários de exclusão, quer seja por meio da marginalização ou da reclusão, de homens e mulheres em diferentes contextos sociais
Abstract: This work's main purpose is to identify discourse strategies in the non-fictional domain based on the analysis of three movies from different moments and their methodological particularities, approaching their historical formation. The choice of the movies was carried out based on the fact they share the subject of life conditions in exclusion scenarios, whether it is by reclusion or marginalization, of men and women in different social contexts.
Mestrado
Mestre em Multimeios

Started as an EOR technique to produce oil, injection of carbon dioxide which is essentially a greenhouse gas is becoming more and more important. Although there are a number of mathematical modeling studies, experimental studies are limited and most studies focus on injection into sandstone reservoirs as opposed to carbonate ones. This study presents the results of computerized tomography (CT) monitored laboratory experiments to characterize relevant chemical reactions associated with injection and storage of CO2 in carbonate formations. Porosity changes along the core plugs and the corresponding permeability changes are reported for varying CO2 injection rates, temperature and salt concentrations. CT monitored experiments are designed to model fast near well bore flow and slow reservoir flows. It was observed that either a permeability improvement or a permeability reduction can be obtained. The trend of change in rock properties is very case dependent because it is related to distribution of pores, brine composition and as well the thermodynamic conditions. As the salt concentration decreased the porosity and thus the permeability decrease was less pronounced. Calcite scaling is mainly influenced by orientation and horizontal flow resulted in larger calcite deposition compared to vertical flow. The duration of CO2 &ndash
rock contact and the amount of area contacted by CO2 seems to have a more pronounced effect compared to rate effect. The experiments were modeled using a multi-phase, non-isothermal commercial simulator where solution and deposition of calcite were considered by the means of chemical reactions. The calibrated model was then used to analyze field scale injections and to model the potential CO2 sequestration capacity of a hypothetical carbonate aquifer formation. It was observed that solubility and hydrodynamic storage of CO2 is larger compared to mineral trapping.

This thesis work aims the ionic liquid pretreatment of peanut shells for co-production of glucose as fermentable sugar and lignin, considering a multi product perspective. The effects of ionic liquid type and pretreatment time period on the sugar and lignin yields were investigated, as the particle size and temperature parameters were determined in the preliminary studies. Peanut shells were pretreated at constant temperature, 150 oC, for 5, 15 and 30 minutes with 1-ethyl-3-methylimidazolium acetate and for 15, 30 and 60 minutes with 1-ethyl-3-methylimidazolium chloride. The pretreated peanut shells were then subjected to enzymatic hydrolysis in order to produce fermentable sugars, mostly, glucose. The solid residue obtained upon enzymatic hydrolysis was analyzed in terms of lignin quantity. 1-ethyl-3-methylimidazolium acetate pretreatment for 15 minutes resulted in the maximum reducing sugar and lignin yields
28 g of reducing sugar and 20 g of solid residue with 70% lignin were obtained per 100 g of peanut shells. Higher pretreatment time resulted in lower yields. Moreover, no optimal time period for 1-ethyl-3- methylimidazolium chloride pretreatment was obtained, since reducing sugar and lignin yields increased as the time period increased. Also all reducing sugar and lignin yields were lower than that obtained with 1-ethyl-3-methylimidazolium acetate. Lignin obtained upon enzymatic hydrolysis of 1-ethyl-3-methylimidazolium acetate pretreated peanut shells were characterized by SEM, FTIR, TGA and XRD analyses, which also showed the morphological and structural effects of pretreatment and enzymatic hydrolysis on peanut shells
and used as concrete admixture, which increased the flow of the concrete by 6%.

Abstract As ideas of cultural identity in Britain solidified between the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, Romantic-period narratives of the nation’s literary heritage confronted and accommodated a long history of contacts and exchanges with neighbouring traditions. This chapter addresses this process of cultural self-construction by exploring how Romantic nonfiction prose engaged with Europe as a literary–cultural continuum and assessed the place of England and Britain within it. Exploring selected literary works—including Thomas Warton’s History of English Poetry (1774–1781), John Dunlop’s History of Fiction (1814), Walter Scott’s essays on chivalry, drama, and romance for the Encyclopaedia Britannica (1818–1824), William Hazlitt’s lectures and critical essays (1817–1820), and Thomas De Quincey’s ‘Letters to a Young Man Whose Education Has Been Neglected’ (1823)—this chapter reappraises how nonfiction prose contributed to the emergence of a Romantic discourse on the nation’s literary–cultural history and identity, its current condition, and possible developments within the encompassing context of Europe.

This introductory chapter provides an overview of Muriel Rukeyser. Although she is now known primarily for her poetry, Rukeyser also produced an extensive body of prose. In her accessible but philosophically complex work, she addresses issues related to racial, gender, and class justice; war and war crimes; the prison-industrial complex; Jewish culture and diaspora; and many other facets of American history, politics, and culture. Throughout her varied career, she produced biographies, film scripts and teleplays, stage plays, children's books, short stories, novels, essays, radio shows, and public lectures, as well as an extensive portfolio of journalism and nonfiction essays on the arts, social justice, and politics. During a period when few women were allowed to position themselves as public intellectuals, most of this writing by Rukeyser has been forgotten, not reprinted since its first appearance if it was published at all. By bringing forth a selection of Rukeyser's political, social, and aesthetic writings for the first time, this volume introduces a new generation of readers to a writer who was trying to think her way through a period as dangerous, promising, and painful as our own.

Stuart Hall has inspired, influenced, and often provoked at least two generations of scholars and activists, across Britain and far beyond. He has held distinguished academic positions in both Cultural Studies (a discipline, or discourse, in whose making and remaking he has been a central figure) and Sociology. But his ideas and their impact have not been, and could not be, confined to any disciplinary mould, nor to the academic world alone. He has written on and been a significant and original voice in debates on popular culture, media and the arts, Thatcherism and the future of the Left, Marx and Gramsci, modernism and postmodernism, racial theories and race relations, concepts of diaspora, globalization, ethnicity, identity, and hybridity—and even that is just a near-random selection from among the themes that his work has addressed. His influence may be encountered, his name invoked, among artists and film-makers, especially younger black British ones, as well as academics. Strikingly, in a recent poll seeking to rank the ‘100 Greatest Black Britons’, Hall was the only living intellectual to feature at all prominently (at no. 10) among musicians, sportspeople, and TV personalities. This polymathic presence does not, however, extend to absolute ubiquity: it should be pointed out that the presenter of the once-popular TV show ‘It’s a Knockout’ was an entirely different Stuart Hall. Our Stuart Hall is, on the face of it, very much a ‘public intellectual’. This is a label more familiar in America than in Britain, and one which sometimes seems to mean ‘glib, media-friendly polemicist’. That is clearly not Hall at all, and perhaps the idea of the public intellectual fits him better if it is redefined: not (just) as someone who appears frequently in the public sphere, but as one whose efforts have always been directed towards defending and extending that sphere, its integrity, democracy, and inclusiveness. It is an ethical as well as a political endeavour. Hall’s lifelong adherence to it, no less than the subject-matter and intellectual power of his essay here, makes him an apt choice to open this collection of Oxford Amnesty Lectures.

Zinaida Gippius’s essay The Obsessed. On Bryusov, written and published during the hero’s lifetime (1921–1922; 1923), had been known, until now, as a well-written literary portrait and valuable memoir testimony. 186 Notwithstanding, of course, “some small errors”. Readers easily and willingly believed Gippius’s story due to author’s literary authority, her high standing in Russian Symbolist movement, long relationship with Bryusov himself, as well as the possibility to write and to publish outside of Soviet censorship. Unfortunately, nobody had ever tried to analyze and to comment on this essay in its essence. Indeed, while proofreading the text from the historical reliability point of view, we can immediately detect not only many factual errors but also conscious distortion of facts well known to the author. For instance, Gippius falsified circumstances of Bryusov’s literary debut. She states that in the middle of 1890s many books of poetry with ‘strange’ titles (like Bryusov’s Chefs d’оeuvre) had appeared. She also insists that “pure ‘decadence’ movement was near to its end”, and adds that “certainly it was not Bryusov who had created new trends and movements in literature.” According to her, “they were born naturally”. In fact, in the mid-1890s Russian Decadent movement was in a cradle, expressed first in poetical works of Bryusov, K.D. Balmont and A.M. Dobrolyubov. In fact, it was Bryusov who mainly organized this new movement if not invented it. Gippius also falsifies the time when Bryusov had begun his collaboration with the Soviet regime (her diary contains much more accurate information), the reasons for and the character of this collaboration. Thus, Bryusov had never served in any Soviet “censorship committee”, had never published a book titled Why I Became a Communist, nor had he lectured on this subject, as Khodasevich falsely stated ‘correcting’ Gippius in his book review of Living Faces. Gippus is also not telling the truth when writing: “I cannot remember any Bryusov’s opinion about any subject more or less broad. We also had never heard him discussing broad subjects with somebody else”. Actually, her own correspondence with Bryusov, as well as Bryusov’s works and letters to other people full of discussions of “subjects more or less broad”, refute her words. While proclaiming, “I am not interpreting ‘a human’. I am talking about real him, as he passed before my eyes, or, perhaps, just flashed before me, about how he looked to me. <…> Whether you write about those alive or dead — you must tell the truth”, Gippius consciously slandered Bryusov passing the most negative judgment onto him. All of the above relates to Bryusov’s psychological portrait created by Gippius: obsession only with literature, complete lack of interest in political and social problems, ‘inability to love’. It’s drowned in mockery about his social origin (a ‘merchant’) and even his physical appearance (‘resemblance to a chimpanzee’). Bryusov’s description is based on catchy, emotionally colored, deliberately provocative but unproved assertions: “Bryusov is a man of absolute, frenzied ambition”; “Surely, because of this sole mad ambition Bryusov did not like any art and could not like any art”; “Did he loved women, all his “mille e tre”? Surely, not” (italics are mine. — V.M.). This text was addressed to readers who did not know Bryusov personally and perhaps were not very familiar with his work. Obviously, Gippius hoped that her story would be blindly accepted. It so happened, that Gippius’s essay became one of the main pillars of Bryusov-smearing, together with Bryusov by V.F. Khodasevich and Hero of Labor by M.I. Tsvetaeva. Detailed analysis makes clear that the text is full 187 of “false and offensive information” and “deliberately slanderous attacks” on Bryusov’s literary, social and private life and so must be qualified as a pasquinade. Masterfully written this essay may not be used as a historical source.