From gammage.kennedy at gmail.com Tue Dec 6 20:39:41 2016 From: gammage.kennedy at gmail.com (Kennedy Gammage) Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2016 20:39:41 -0800 Subject: [ilds] SO THE ILDS LISTSERV IS DEAD Message-ID: Hello? Hello? Sorry there?s no pulse. Flatline. Congrats on the latest Herald by the way. Maybe the best one ever Pamela. Still?for those of us who use social media, it should be very obvious that Facebook and Twitter cannot replicate the robust discussions we all enjoyed on the listserv back in the day. The media are totally different, and are not interactive in the same way. (*Like! I *Like what you just said about Aubrey Blanford!) Infantile. Is Facebook now the preferred medium for academic discourse? I didn?t think so. But what is? Meeting in Louisville once a year? Transparency is a concept we are all familiar with, and I am in constant contact with a disgruntled cabal who feel their input as dues-paying members of our order have been repeatedly ignored over the years. They have a number of complaints about how the ILDS is run, which could be constructive criticism if there was any interest in listening. Thanks for the link to the NexusMiller publication. Looking forward to reading Normajean?s article. Cheers - Ken -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From billyapt at gmail.com Wed Dec 7 11:33:43 2016 From: billyapt at gmail.com (William Apt) Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 13:33:43 -0600 Subject: [ilds] LISTSERV Message-ID: Dearest all: I use neither Facebook nor Twitter. Does that mean that I will not be able to participate in or keep up with discussions unless I join these outlets? Billy -- WILLIAM APT Attorney at Law 812 San Antonio St, Ste 401 Austin TX 78701 512/708-8300 512/708-8011 FAX -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bredwine1968 at gmail.com Wed Dec 7 15:09:30 2016 From: bredwine1968 at gmail.com (Bruce Redwine) Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 15:09:30 -0800 Subject: [ilds] ILDS Listserv Message-ID: <3246813F-49D5-4AD2-B80A-8453DFB964AD@gmail.com> As a due-paying member of the ILDS, I think we need a clarification on the function of the ILDS listserv. Let me quote James Clawson, the incoming president of the ILDS, as he explains in the current Herald: In truth, we?ve been outgrowing the technology behind the listserv for a few years now, and it has with me become a distraction from the work it was meant to serve. We recommend to users that they move the discussion elsewhere? for example, to Facebook, where Pamela keeps up the public group, or to Twitter, where Charles maintains an active presence with @ DurrellSociety. With 130 members in the first of these and 1,600 followers of the latter, these groups serve far more active participants than the listserv, and they?re a vibrant means to reach outward beyond the invisible walls of what could otherwise become an echo chamber. Now, what is Clawson really saying? The listserv, to which he almost never contributed, has become a ?distraction.? (If I recall correctly, Clawson made only one brief comment re the idea of Durrell?s latent ?homosexuality.?) That is, he doesn?t want to engage in any kind of serious discussion?for whatever reason. (So the advice of one academic?time is better spent writing articles for tenure and promotion.) And what was the listserv ?meant to serve?? What is it now intended to become? Presumably a vehicle for a kind of Durrellian agitprop, which can be more effectively propagated on social networks such as Twitter and Facebook. And why did the listserv become an ?echo chamber?? Because, with one notable exception, academics never contribute to the discussions. Yes, Clawson's reasoning is circular. I don?t use social networks and never will. These are not forums for ?discussion,? as Clawson claims. They?re places for dropping one-liners and postcard impressions. I?m very suspicious of those who use these outlets. I think that they pander to the craving for fame and recognition and that they promote lazy thinking, the kind president-elect Donald Trump indulges in. Bruce -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From delospeter at hotmail.com Wed Dec 7 21:47:40 2016 From: delospeter at hotmail.com (PETER BALDWIN) Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 05:47:40 +0000 Subject: [ilds] ILDS Listserv In-Reply-To: <3246813F-49D5-4AD2-B80A-8453DFB964AD@gmail.com> References: <3246813F-49D5-4AD2-B80A-8453DFB964AD@gmail.com> Message-ID: A number of comments : 1. The ILDS needs to keep up with the times and consider how best to use social media 2. All such media are open to abuse and that, regrettably, has to be factored into our use of such media 3. If James' comments reflect a change of ILDS policy determined by the ILDS committee, I would rather it had be sent out first via The Herald for consultation. 4. Against my better judgement, I subscribe to both Facebook and Twitter. Contrary to my expectation when I subscribed to Facebook with a view to keeping in touch with far-fling family, I consider it useless. However, I have found it invaluable for special interest groups where info and photos can be shared - both helpful and enjoyable. I am still finding my feet with Twitter but, again, think it is a good forum for views on shared interest. 5. I personally would keep the list serve since there is no character limit. Hope these comments help Peter Baldwin Sent from my iPhone On 7 Dec 2016, at 23:43, Bruce Redwine > wrote: As a due-paying member of the ILDS, I think we need a clarification on the function of the ILDS listserv. Let me quote James Clawson, the incoming president of the ILDS, as he explains in the current Herald: In truth, we've been outgrowing the technology behind the listserv for a few years now, and it has with me become a distraction from the work it was meant to serve. We recommend to users that they move the discussion elsewhere- for example, to Facebook, where Pamela keeps up the public group, or to Twitter, where Charles maintains an active presence with @ DurrellSociety. With 130 members in the first of these and 1,600 followers of the latter, these groups serve far more active participants than the listserv, and they're a vibrant means to reach outward beyond the invisible walls of what could otherwise become an echo chamber. Now, what is Clawson really saying? The listserv, to which he almost never contributed, has become a "distraction." (If I recall correctly, Clawson made only one brief comment re the idea of Durrell's latent "homosexuality.") That is, he doesn't want to engage in any kind of serious discussion-for whatever reason. (So the advice of one academic-time is better spent writing articles for tenure and promotion.) And what was the listserv "meant to serve?" What is it now intended to become? Presumably a vehicle for a kind of Durrellian agitprop, which can be more effectively propagated on social networks such as Twitter and Facebook. And why did the listserv become an "echo chamber?" Because, with one notable exception, academics never contribute to the discussions. Yes, Clawson's reasoning is circular. I don't use social networks and never will. These are not forums for "discussion," as Clawson claims. They're places for dropping one-liners and postcard impressions. I'm very suspicious of those who use these outlets. I think that they pander to the craving for fame and recognition and that they promote lazy thinking, the kind president-elect Donald Trump indulges in. Bruce _______________________________________________ ILDS mailing list ILDS at lists.uvic.ca https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From alfandary at gmail.com Wed Dec 7 22:12:02 2016 From: alfandary at gmail.com (Rony Alfandary) Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 08:12:02 +0200 Subject: [ilds] Durrell in Hebrew Message-ID: Dear friends, I am very happy to announce the publication of my Hebrew book `Exile and Return - a Psychoanalytic study of Lawrence Durrell's The Alexandria Quartet`. It is published with Carmel Publishers Inc. which is a fine publishing house in Israel, well respected in academic circles and also well distributed. It is the first ever book written about Durrell in Hebrew (to the best of my knowledge). I hope it will be received well. in my preface to the book, I mentioned the generous encouragement and assistance I received from some members of the Society when I began the work, especially during the 2012 London conference. Best, *Rony Alfandary*, Ph.D. *Clinical Social Worker, Psychoanalytic Psychotherapist* Postgraduate Program of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy Dept. of Social Work Bar-Ilan University Ramat-Gan 51905 On 8 December 2016 at 01:09, Bruce Redwine wrote: > As a due-paying member of the ILDS, I think we need a clarification on the > function of the ILDS listserv. Let me quote James Clawson, the incoming > president of the ILDS, as he explains in the current *Herald:* > > In truth, we?ve been outgrowing the technology behind the listserv for a > few years now, and it has with me become a distraction from the work it > was meant to serve. We recommend to users that they move the discussion > elsewhere? for example, to Facebook, where Pamela keeps up the public > group, or to Twitter, where Charles maintains an active presence with @ > DurrellSociety. With 130 members in the first of these and 1,600 followers > of the latter, these groups serve far more active participants than the > listserv, and they?re a vibrant means to reach outward beyond the invisible > walls of what could otherwise become an echo chamber. > > Now, what is Clawson really saying? The listserv, to which he almost > never contributed, has become a ?distraction.? (If I recall correctly, > Clawson made only one brief comment re the idea of Durrell?s latent > ?homosexuality.?) That is, he doesn?t want to engage in any kind of > serious discussion?for whatever reason. (So the advice of one > academic?time is better spent writing articles for tenure and promotion.) > And what was the listserv ?meant to serve?? What is it now intended to > become? Presumably a vehicle for a kind of Durrellian agitprop, which can > be more effectively propagated on social networks such as Twitter and > Facebook. And why did the listserv become an ?echo chamber?? Because, > with one notable exception, academics never contribute to the discussions. > Yes, Clawson's reasoning is circular. > I don?t use social networks and never will. These are not forums for > ?discussion,? as Clawson claims. They?re places for dropping one-liners > and postcard impressions. I?m very suspicious of those who use these > outlets. I think that they pander to the craving for fame and recognition > and that they promote lazy thinking, the kind president-elect Donald Trump > indulges in. > > Bruce > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From james.d.gifford at gmail.com Thu Dec 8 10:16:38 2016 From: james.d.gifford at gmail.com (James Gifford) Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 10:16:38 -0800 Subject: [ilds] Durrell in Hebrew In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <89a1d12e-ce12-f419-8590-6d9652208dbb@gmail.com> Enormous congratulations, Rony! Can you share the full details? Very best, James On 2016-12-07 10:12 PM, Rony Alfandary wrote: > > Dear friends, I am very happy to announce the publication of my Hebrew > book `Exile and Return - a Psychoanalytic study of Lawrence Durrell's > The Alexandria Quartet`. It is published with Carmel Publishers Inc. > which is a fine publishing house in Israel, well respected in academic > circles and also well distributed. It is the first ever book written > about Durrell in Hebrew (to the best of my knowledge). I hope it will be > received well. in my preface to the book, I mentioned the generous > encouragement and assistance I received from some members of the Society > when I began the work, especially during the 2012 London conference. > Best, > > *Rony Alfandary*, Ph.D. > /Clinical Social Worker, Psychoanalytic Psychotherapist/ > > Postgraduate Program of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy > > Dept. of Social Work > > Bar-Ilan University > > Ramat-Gan 51905 From alfandary at gmail.com Thu Dec 8 10:25:50 2016 From: alfandary at gmail.com (Rony Alfandary) Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 20:25:50 +0200 Subject: [ilds] Durrell in Hebrew In-Reply-To: <89a1d12e-ce12-f419-8590-6d9652208dbb@gmail.com> References: <89a1d12e-ce12-f419-8590-6d9652208dbb@gmail.com> Message-ID: thank you! if you look at the FB page of the society you will see the cover. i dont think you can upload images here, can you? attached is an English abstract. Was that what you meant? rony *Rony Alfandary*, Ph.D. *Clinical Social Worker, Psychoanalytic Psychotherapist* Postgraduate Program of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy Dept. of Social Work Bar-Ilan University Ramat-Gan 51905 On 8 December 2016 at 20:16, James Gifford wrote: > Enormous congratulations, Rony! Can you share the full details? > > Very best, > James > > On 2016-12-07 10:12 PM, Rony Alfandary wrote: > >> >> Dear friends, I am very happy to announce the publication of my Hebrew >> book `Exile and Return - a Psychoanalytic study of Lawrence Durrell's >> The Alexandria Quartet`. It is published with Carmel Publishers Inc. >> which is a fine publishing house in Israel, well respected in academic >> circles and also well distributed. It is the first ever book written >> about Durrell in Hebrew (to the best of my knowledge). I hope it will be >> received well. in my preface to the book, I mentioned the generous >> encouragement and assistance I received from some members of the Society >> when I began the work, especially during the 2012 London conference. >> Best, >> >> *Rony Alfandary*, Ph.D. >> /Clinical Social Worker, Psychoanalytic Psychotherapist/ >> >> Postgraduate Program of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy >> >> Dept. of Social Work >> >> Bar-Ilan University >> >> Ramat-Gan 51905 >> > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: English abstarct.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 16527 bytes Desc: not available URL: From gammage.kennedy at gmail.com Thu Dec 8 11:38:30 2016 From: gammage.kennedy at gmail.com (Kennedy Gammage) Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 11:38:30 -0800 Subject: [ilds] Durrell in Hebrew In-Reply-To: References: <89a1d12e-ce12-f419-8590-6d9652208dbb@gmail.com> Message-ID: Thank you Rony. Very interesting. The bit about Freud and Durrell reminded me of a slangy expression my friends used to say: "Who's yer daddy?" - Ken On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 10:25 AM, Rony Alfandary wrote: > thank you! if you look at the FB page of the society you will see the > cover. i dont think you can upload images here, can you? attached is an > English abstract. > Was that what you meant? > rony > > > > > > > > > > > *Rony Alfandary*, Ph.D. > *Clinical Social Worker, Psychoanalytic Psychotherapist* > > Postgraduate Program of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy > > Dept. of Social Work > > Bar-Ilan University > > Ramat-Gan 51905 > > > > > > On 8 December 2016 at 20:16, James Gifford > wrote: > >> Enormous congratulations, Rony! Can you share the full details? >> >> Very best, >> James >> >> On 2016-12-07 10:12 PM, Rony Alfandary wrote: >> >>> >>> Dear friends, I am very happy to announce the publication of my Hebrew >>> book `Exile and Return - a Psychoanalytic study of Lawrence Durrell's >>> The Alexandria Quartet`. It is published with Carmel Publishers Inc. >>> which is a fine publishing house in Israel, well respected in academic >>> circles and also well distributed. It is the first ever book written >>> about Durrell in Hebrew (to the best of my knowledge). I hope it will be >>> received well. in my preface to the book, I mentioned the generous >>> encouragement and assistance I received from some members of the Society >>> when I began the work, especially during the 2012 London conference. >>> Best, >>> >>> *Rony Alfandary*, Ph.D. >>> /Clinical Social Worker, Psychoanalytic Psychotherapist/ >>> >>> Postgraduate Program of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy >>> >>> Dept. of Social Work >>> >>> Bar-Ilan University >>> >>> Ramat-Gan 51905 >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> ILDS mailing list >> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds >> > > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From robin.w.collins at gmail.com Thu Dec 8 13:33:08 2016 From: robin.w.collins at gmail.com (Robin Collins) Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 16:33:08 -0500 Subject: [ilds] listserv utility Message-ID: Hi, I am on several listservs (and I moderate one). It is very clear that listservs serve very different functions than does FB or twitter, etc. They enable longer and more considered discussion (including debate) of topics of interest to subscribers. If the problem is not having a moderator that can put in the time of moderating, then the list could be converted to unmoderated. Subscribers can still receive content immediately or in an accumulated format (I use accumulated). I like the current setup (if anyone was asking). Robin -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From delospeter at hotmail.com Thu Dec 8 20:21:33 2016 From: delospeter at hotmail.com (PETER BALDWIN) Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2016 04:21:33 +0000 Subject: [ilds] listserv utility In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I would be very fearful if the ILDS list serve was not moderated given the personal nature of some comments posted in the past. I do not know if 'our' forum is unusual in this respect. Peter Sent from my iPhone > On 8 Dec 2016, at 21:47, Robin Collins wrote: > > Hi, > > I am on several listservs (and I moderate one). It is very clear that listservs serve very different functions than does FB or twitter, etc. They enable longer and more considered discussion (including debate) of topics of interest to subscribers. > If the problem is not having a moderator that can put in the time of moderating, then the list could be converted to unmoderated. Subscribers can still receive content immediately or in an accumulated format (I use accumulated). > I like the current setup (if anyone was asking). > > Robin > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds From james.d.gifford at gmail.com Thu Dec 8 21:12:06 2016 From: james.d.gifford at gmail.com (James Gifford) Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 21:12:06 -0800 Subject: [ilds] listserv utility In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <00421757-0027-629b-34bd-349dcf6354f2@gmail.com> Dear Peter & Robin, I've meant to respond, but the end of term presses, and that means real material things in real life (IRL) to those who have urgent demands on my time... Indeed, moderation is necessary (literally and euphemistically), if only to keep everyone from receiving the daily spam of growing this, putting hair here but not there, or sending funds from somethere to overwhere (also literally and euphemistically) [how gendered that all seems!]. But we need moderation for other reasons too. There are two underlying things, apart from keeping safe spaces real and avoiding the drift of today's cultural climate: (1) we have a geriatric technological platform that, like radio, also offers a real service despite inevitable communicative biases (in Harold Innis' sense), and (2) the ILDS genuinely wants to serve its members' interests insofar as they serve our main purpose of fostering interest in Durrell's works. We've actually been debating the medium for years, but those of us under the exigencies of institutional demands on the trimester system tend to work in bursts at 4 month increments. We might have a blizzard here tomorrow -- if we do, I'll write something more concrete. If not, rest assured there are a number of things a long time in the making, but maybe just a little bit longer... I'm underwater until exams finish next week, so while I'll respond as best I can to everyone, other people do have more urgent calls for the immediate future. In the meantime, some updates very shortly. All best, James On 2016-12-08 8:21 PM, PETER BALDWIN wrote: > I would be very fearful if the ILDS list serve was not moderated given the personal nature of some comments posted in the past. I do not know if 'our' forum is unusual in this respect. > > Peter > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On 8 Dec 2016, at 21:47, Robin Collins wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I am on several listservs (and I moderate one). It is very clear that listservs serve very different functions than does FB or twitter, etc. They enable longer and more considered discussion (including debate) of topics of interest to subscribers. >> If the problem is not having a moderator that can put in the time of moderating, then the list could be converted to unmoderated. Subscribers can still receive content immediately or in an accumulated format (I use accumulated). >> I like the current setup (if anyone was asking). >> >> Robin From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Thu Dec 8 20:42:56 2016 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 20:42:56 -0800 Subject: [ilds] listserv utility In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: I think a greater concern is the characterization of the listserv as a "distraction" in need of replacement. Bruce Sent from my iPhone > On Dec 8, 2016, at 8:21 PM, PETER BALDWIN wrote: > > I would be very fearful if the ILDS list serve was not moderated given the personal nature of some comments posted in the past. I do not know if 'our' forum is unusual in this respect. > > Peter > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On 8 Dec 2016, at 21:47, Robin Collins wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I am on several listservs (and I moderate one). It is very clear that listservs serve very different functions than does FB or twitter, etc. They enable longer and more considered discussion (including debate) of topics of interest to subscribers. >> If the problem is not having a moderator that can put in the time of moderating, then the list could be converted to unmoderated. Subscribers can still receive content immediately or in an accumulated format (I use accumulated). >> I like the current setup (if anyone was asking). >> >> Robin >> _______________________________________________ >> ILDS mailing list >> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds From james.d.gifford at gmail.com Thu Dec 8 22:16:29 2016 From: james.d.gifford at gmail.com (James Gifford) Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 22:16:29 -0800 Subject: [ilds] New Herald issue Message-ID: Dear all, As a very quick note, for anyone who has not seen it, the latest issue of the ILDS Herald is now online: http://lawrencedurrell.org/wp_durrell/the-herald/ No. 36 is the current issue. All best, James From pamelajofrancis at gmail.com Fri Dec 9 07:43:04 2016 From: pamelajofrancis at gmail.com (Pamela Francis) Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2016 09:43:04 -0600 Subject: [ilds] ILDS Digest, Vol 116, Issue 2 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: subject: Bruce Redwine's comments: >That is, he doesn?t want to engage in any kind of > serious discussion?for whatever reason. (So the advice of one > academic?time is better spent writing articles for tenure and promotion.) To Bruce and other members of the listserve: Mr. Redwine's comment is exactly the kind of statement that indicates that this listserve has become a forum for personal grievances rather than any sort of useful discussion. I don't know what you have against people who do academic work, Bruce, but I refuse to even take part in a forum where the very nature of my life's work is somehow considered to be so much blather. No one has ever, to my knowledge (though admittedly, I don't use this forum for the reason stated) said that you don't have any sort of validity in your research just because you are not an academic; however, I do not see the same respect for those of us who do make our living by teaching. You have no idea what teaching in a university in the US is like now--tenure barely even exists, and James Clawson and I both teach in institutions where research and publishing are secondary to the instructional components of our job. It is hard work, and time-consuming work, and to be accused of some sort of snobbery towards non-academics that I know neither James Clawson nor I nor any of the other Board members possess is insulting and uncalled-for. As for out-dated technology; well, yes, listserves are outdated. I subscribed to about five of them about ten years ago. As far as I know, this is the only one that is still extant. If you choose not to use social media, so be it, but I find our page to be lively and informative, and I have come to know a great number of people (most, for your information, NOT academics) from all over the world. We are investigating other forums, but I will say that the listserve has become little more than a place for you to make derogatory comments about other Durrellians and this is the main reason that I, at least, will be more than happy to see this forum go away. I promote Durrell scholarship, but I also promote general discussion on both Durrells, and if you have ever attended an OMG (I think you were in Victoria?), you would know that a number of our participants are not affiliated with universities, but are thoughtful admirers of Larry and his work. Our Society has room for all those who are interested in him, but it does NOT have room for people who are for some reason dismissive of those from one or the other "camp." The fact that I have to refer to two "camps" is a problem, and one that I never dreamed would be an issue in this Society. I realize this is not a well-written reply--I am in the middle of giving a final, which is some of that work I do to get "promoted," which means that in another three years, I'll get another $300 a year added to my salary. Having read some of your missives, I know that you will likely tear apart my writing. But I have read too many of these mean-spirited posts, and I have just had enough. This listserve is not in the spirit of genuine dialogue about a fascinating and complicated writer, and I, for one, do not mourn its passing. Sincerely, Pamela J. Francis, Vice-President, International Lawrence Durrell Society and Editor, The Lawrence Durrell Society Herald. On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 2:00 PM, wrote: > Send ILDS mailing list submissions to > ilds at lists.uvic.ca > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca > > You can reach the person managing the list at > ilds-owner at lists.uvic.ca > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of ILDS digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. LISTSERV (William Apt) > 2. ILDS Listserv (Bruce Redwine) > 3. Re: ILDS Listserv (PETER BALDWIN) > 4. Durrell in Hebrew (Rony Alfandary) > 5. Re: Durrell in Hebrew (James Gifford) > 6. Re: Durrell in Hebrew (Rony Alfandary) > 7. Re: Durrell in Hebrew (Kennedy Gammage) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 13:33:43 -0600 > From: William Apt > To: "ilds at lists.uvic.ca" > Subject: [ilds] LISTSERV > Message-ID: > Jk_JbJjhw at mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Dearest all: > > I use neither Facebook nor Twitter. Does that mean that I will not be able > to participate in or keep up > with discussions unless I join these outlets? > > Billy > -- > WILLIAM APT > Attorney at Law > 812 San Antonio St, Ste 401 > Austin TX 78701 > 512/708-8300 > 512/708-8011 FAX > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: 20161207/ec743aa2/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 15:09:30 -0800 > From: Bruce Redwine > To: Sumantra Nag > Cc: Bruce Redwine > Subject: [ilds] ILDS Listserv > Message-ID: <3246813F-49D5-4AD2-B80A-8453DFB964AD at gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > As a due-paying member of the ILDS, I think we need a clarification on the > function of the ILDS listserv. Let me quote James Clawson, the incoming > president of the ILDS, as he explains in the current Herald: > In truth, we?ve been outgrowing the technology behind the listserv for a > few years now, and it has with me become a distraction from the work it was > meant to serve. We recommend to users that they move the discussion > elsewhere? for example, to Facebook, where Pamela keeps up the public > group, or to Twitter, where Charles maintains an active presence with @ > DurrellSociety. With 130 members in the first of these and 1,600 followers > of the latter, these groups serve far more active participants than the > listserv, and they?re a vibrant means to reach outward beyond the invisible > walls of what could otherwise become an echo chamber. > > Now, what is Clawson really saying? The listserv, to which he almost > never contributed, has become a ?distraction.? (If I recall correctly, > Clawson made only one brief comment re the idea of Durrell?s latent > ?homosexuality.?) That is, he doesn?t want to engage in any kind of > serious discussion?for whatever reason. (So the advice of one > academic?time is better spent writing articles for tenure and promotion.) > And what was the listserv ?meant to serve?? What is it now intended to > become? Presumably a vehicle for a kind of Durrellian agitprop, which can > be more effectively propagated on social networks such as Twitter and > Facebook. And why did the listserv become an ?echo chamber?? Because, > with one notable exception, academics never contribute to the discussions. > Yes, Clawson's reasoning is circular. > > I don?t use social networks and never will. These are not forums for > ?discussion,? as Clawson claims. They?re places for dropping one-liners > and postcard impressions. I?m very suspicious of those who use these > outlets. I think that they pander to the craving for fame and recognition > and that they promote lazy thinking, the kind president-elect Donald Trump > indulges in. > > Bruce > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: 20161207/ea773856/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 05:47:40 +0000 > From: PETER BALDWIN > To: "ilds at lists.uvic.ca" > Subject: Re: [ilds] ILDS Listserv > Message-ID: > GBRP123.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > A number of comments : > > 1. The ILDS needs to keep up with the times and consider how best to use > social media > > 2. All such media are open to abuse and that, regrettably, has to be > factored into our use of such media > > 3. If James' comments reflect a change of ILDS policy determined by the > ILDS committee, I would rather it had be sent out first via The Herald for > consultation. > > 4. Against my better judgement, I subscribe to both Facebook and Twitter. > Contrary to my expectation when I subscribed to Facebook with a view to > keeping in touch with far-fling family, I consider it useless. However, I > have found it invaluable for special interest groups where info and photos > can be shared - both helpful and enjoyable. I am still finding my feet with > Twitter but, again, think it is a good forum for views on shared interest. > > 5. I personally would keep the list serve since there is no character > limit. > > Hope these comments help > > Peter Baldwin > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 7 Dec 2016, at 23:43, Bruce Redwine bredwine1968 at gmail.com>> wrote: > > As a due-paying member of the ILDS, I think we need a clarification on the > function of the ILDS listserv. Let me quote James Clawson, the incoming > president of the ILDS, as he explains in the current Herald: > > In truth, we've been outgrowing the technology behind the listserv for a > few years now, and it has with me become a distraction from the work it was > meant to serve. We recommend to users that they move the discussion > elsewhere- for example, to Facebook, where Pamela keeps up the public > group, or to Twitter, where Charles maintains an active presence with @ > DurrellSociety. With 130 members in the first of these and 1,600 followers > of the latter, these groups serve far more active participants than the > listserv, and they're a vibrant means to reach outward beyond the invisible > walls of what could otherwise become an echo chamber. > > Now, what is Clawson really saying? The listserv, to which he almost > never contributed, has become a "distraction." (If I recall correctly, > Clawson made only one brief comment re the idea of Durrell's latent > "homosexuality.") That is, he doesn't want to engage in any kind of > serious discussion-for whatever reason. (So the advice of one > academic-time is better spent writing articles for tenure and promotion.) > And what was the listserv "meant to serve?" What is it now intended to > become? Presumably a vehicle for a kind of Durrellian agitprop, which can > be more effectively propagated on social networks such as Twitter and > Facebook. And why did the listserv become an "echo chamber?" Because, > with one notable exception, academics never contribute to the discussions. > Yes, Clawson's reasoning is circular. > > I don't use social networks and never will. These are not forums for > "discussion," as Clawson claims. They're places for dropping one-liners > and postcard impressions. I'm very suspicious of those who use these > outlets. I think that they pander to the craving for fame and recognition > and that they promote lazy thinking, the kind president-elect Donald Trump > indulges in. > > Bruce > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: 20161208/aef4a59e/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 4 > Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 08:12:02 +0200 > From: Rony Alfandary > To: Durrell List Serve > Subject: [ilds] Durrell in Hebrew > Message-ID: > gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Dear friends, I am very happy to announce the publication of my Hebrew book > `Exile and Return - a Psychoanalytic study of Lawrence Durrell's The > Alexandria Quartet`. It is published with Carmel Publishers Inc. which is a > fine publishing house in Israel, well respected in academic circles and > also well distributed. It is the first ever book written about Durrell in > Hebrew (to the best of my knowledge). I hope it will be received well. in > my preface to the book, I mentioned the generous encouragement and > assistance I received from some members of the Society when I began the > work, especially during the 2012 London conference. > Best, > > *Rony Alfandary*, Ph.D. > *Clinical Social Worker, Psychoanalytic Psychotherapist* > > Postgraduate Program of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy > > Dept. of Social Work > > Bar-Ilan University > > Ramat-Gan 51905 > > > > > > On 8 December 2016 at 01:09, Bruce Redwine wrote: > > > As a due-paying member of the ILDS, I think we need a clarification on > the > > function of the ILDS listserv. Let me quote James Clawson, the incoming > > president of the ILDS, as he explains in the current *Herald:* > > > > In truth, we?ve been outgrowing the technology behind the listserv for a > > few years now, and it has with me become a distraction from the work it > > was meant to serve. We recommend to users that they move the discussion > > elsewhere? for example, to Facebook, where Pamela keeps up the public > > group, or to Twitter, where Charles maintains an active presence with @ > > DurrellSociety. With 130 members in the first of these and 1,600 > followers > > of the latter, these groups serve far more active participants than the > > listserv, and they?re a vibrant means to reach outward beyond the > invisible > > walls of what could otherwise become an echo chamber. > > > > Now, what is Clawson really saying? The listserv, to which he almost > > never contributed, has become a ?distraction.? (If I recall correctly, > > Clawson made only one brief comment re the idea of Durrell?s latent > > ?homosexuality.?) That is, he doesn?t want to engage in any kind of > > serious discussion?for whatever reason. (So the advice of one > > academic?time is better spent writing articles for tenure and promotion.) > > And what was the listserv ?meant to serve?? What is it now intended to > > become? Presumably a vehicle for a kind of Durrellian agitprop, which > can > > be more effectively propagated on social networks such as Twitter and > > Facebook. And why did the listserv become an ?echo chamber?? Because, > > with one notable exception, academics never contribute to the > discussions. > > Yes, Clawson's reasoning is circular. > > I don?t use social networks and never will. These are not forums for > > ?discussion,? as Clawson claims. They?re places for dropping one-liners > > and postcard impressions. I?m very suspicious of those who use these > > outlets. I think that they pander to the craving for fame and > recognition > > and that they promote lazy thinking, the kind president-elect Donald > Trump > > indulges in. > > > > Bruce > > > > _______________________________________________ > > ILDS mailing list > > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: 20161208/fd8942eb/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 5 > Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 10:16:38 -0800 > From: James Gifford > To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca > Subject: Re: [ilds] Durrell in Hebrew > Message-ID: <89a1d12e-ce12-f419-8590-6d9652208dbb at gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed > > Enormous congratulations, Rony! Can you share the full details? > > Very best, > James > > On 2016-12-07 10:12 PM, Rony Alfandary wrote: > > > > Dear friends, I am very happy to announce the publication of my Hebrew > > book `Exile and Return - a Psychoanalytic study of Lawrence Durrell's > > The Alexandria Quartet`. It is published with Carmel Publishers Inc. > > which is a fine publishing house in Israel, well respected in academic > > circles and also well distributed. It is the first ever book written > > about Durrell in Hebrew (to the best of my knowledge). I hope it will be > > received well. in my preface to the book, I mentioned the generous > > encouragement and assistance I received from some members of the Society > > when I began the work, especially during the 2012 London conference. > > Best, > > > > *Rony Alfandary*, Ph.D. > > /Clinical Social Worker, Psychoanalytic Psychotherapist/ > > > > Postgraduate Program of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy > > > > Dept. of Social Work > > > > Bar-Ilan University > > > > Ramat-Gan 51905 > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 6 > Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 20:25:50 +0200 > From: Rony Alfandary > To: James Gifford , Durrell List Serve > > Subject: Re: [ilds] Durrell in Hebrew > Message-ID: > gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > thank you! if you look at the FB page of the society you will see the > cover. i dont think you can upload images here, can you? attached is an > English abstract. > Was that what you meant? > rony > > > > > > > > > > > *Rony Alfandary*, Ph.D. > *Clinical Social Worker, Psychoanalytic Psychotherapist* > > Postgraduate Program of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy > > Dept. of Social Work > > Bar-Ilan University > > Ramat-Gan 51905 > > > > > > On 8 December 2016 at 20:16, James Gifford > wrote: > > > Enormous congratulations, Rony! Can you share the full details? > > > > Very best, > > James > > > > On 2016-12-07 10:12 PM, Rony Alfandary wrote: > > > >> > >> Dear friends, I am very happy to announce the publication of my Hebrew > >> book `Exile and Return - a Psychoanalytic study of Lawrence Durrell's > >> The Alexandria Quartet`. It is published with Carmel Publishers Inc. > >> which is a fine publishing house in Israel, well respected in academic > >> circles and also well distributed. It is the first ever book written > >> about Durrell in Hebrew (to the best of my knowledge). I hope it will be > >> received well. in my preface to the book, I mentioned the generous > >> encouragement and assistance I received from some members of the Society > >> when I began the work, especially during the 2012 London conference. > >> Best, > >> > >> *Rony Alfandary*, Ph.D. > >> /Clinical Social Worker, Psychoanalytic Psychotherapist/ > >> > >> Postgraduate Program of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy > >> > >> Dept. of Social Work > >> > >> Bar-Ilan University > >> > >> Ramat-Gan 51905 > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > ILDS mailing list > > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: 20161208/f2f707da/attachment-0001.html> > -------------- next part -------------- > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > Name: English abstarct.docx > Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument. > wordprocessingml.document > Size: 16527 bytes > Desc: not available > URL: 20161208/f2f707da/attachment-0001.bin> > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 7 > Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 11:38:30 -0800 > From: Kennedy Gammage > To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca > Subject: Re: [ilds] Durrell in Hebrew > Message-ID: > mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Thank you Rony. Very interesting. The bit about Freud and Durrell reminded > me of a slangy expression my friends used to say: "Who's yer daddy?" > > - Ken > > On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 10:25 AM, Rony Alfandary > wrote: > > > thank you! if you look at the FB page of the society you will see the > > cover. i dont think you can upload images here, can you? attached is an > > English abstract. > > Was that what you meant? > > rony > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *Rony Alfandary*, Ph.D. > > *Clinical Social Worker, Psychoanalytic Psychotherapist* > > > > Postgraduate Program of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy > > > > Dept. of Social Work > > > > Bar-Ilan University > > > > Ramat-Gan 51905 > > > > > > > > > > > > On 8 December 2016 at 20:16, James Gifford > > wrote: > > > >> Enormous congratulations, Rony! Can you share the full details? > >> > >> Very best, > >> James > >> > >> On 2016-12-07 10:12 PM, Rony Alfandary wrote: > >> > >>> > >>> Dear friends, I am very happy to announce the publication of my Hebrew > >>> book `Exile and Return - a Psychoanalytic study of Lawrence Durrell's > >>> The Alexandria Quartet`. It is published with Carmel Publishers Inc. > >>> which is a fine publishing house in Israel, well respected in academic > >>> circles and also well distributed. It is the first ever book written > >>> about Durrell in Hebrew (to the best of my knowledge). I hope it will > be > >>> received well. in my preface to the book, I mentioned the generous > >>> encouragement and assistance I received from some members of the > Society > >>> when I began the work, especially during the 2012 London conference. > >>> Best, > >>> > >>> *Rony Alfandary*, Ph.D. > >>> /Clinical Social Worker, Psychoanalytic Psychotherapist/ > >>> > >>> Postgraduate Program of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy > >>> > >>> Dept. of Social Work > >>> > >>> Bar-Ilan University > >>> > >>> Ramat-Gan 51905 > >>> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> ILDS mailing list > >> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > >> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > ILDS mailing list > > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > > > > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: 20161208/e7e6eee4/attachment-0001.html> > > ------------------------------ > > Subject: Digest Footer > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > > ------------------------------ > > End of ILDS Digest, Vol 116, Issue 2 > ************************************ > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From grtaneja47 at hotmail.com Fri Dec 9 09:42:19 2016 From: grtaneja47 at hotmail.com (G. R. Taneja) Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2016 17:42:19 +0000 Subject: [ilds] ILDS Digest, Vol 116, Issue 2 In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: Dear Pamela, Under the circumstances, you couldn't have responded better. I endorse your position on almost all issues that you have touched. I have not been active on the List for a while for a variety of personal, inescapable limitations. But I would regret if it shuts down as a reaction to the kind of outburst Bruce allows himself to indulge in. If Bruce does not like what we do or say or why we do and say what we do and say, I am sure he would find more congenial avenues for his articulations. The myth of academics having it easy is very wide spread. Maybe I could mention that I went and wrote a doctoral thesis in France (I live in India) AFTER I retired three years ago. This work would bring me no promotions, salary-raise, grants and credits. I did it because that's the kind of thing all academics do before they retire and after. They do it because it makes them happy. Warmly, G R Taneja In-between Website: G. R. Taneja ??/ ??Editor In-between: Essays & Studies in Literary Criticism Department of English, R. L. A. College, University of Delhi Anand Niketan Colony, Benito Juarez Marg, New Delhi-110 021, ??India ________________________________ From: ILDS on behalf of Pamela Francis Sent: Friday, December 9, 2016 9:13:04 PM To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca Subject: Re: [ilds] ILDS Digest, Vol 116, Issue 2 subject: Bruce Redwine's comments: >That is, he doesn?t want to engage in any kind of > serious discussion?for whatever reason. (So the advice of one > academic?time is better spent writing articles for tenure and promotion.) To Bruce and other members of the listserve: Mr. Redwine's comment is exactly the kind of statement that indicates that this listserve has become a forum for personal grievances rather than any sort of useful discussion. I don't know what you have against people who do academic work, Bruce, but I refuse to even take part in a forum where the very nature of my life's work is somehow considered to be so much blather. No one has ever, to my knowledge (though admittedly, I don't use this forum for the reason stated) said that you don't have any sort of validity in your research just because you are not an academic; however, I do not see the same respect for those of us who do make our living by teaching. You have no idea what teaching in a university in the US is like now--tenure barely even exists, and James Clawson and I both teach in institutions where research and publishing are secondary to the instructional components of our job. It is hard work, and time-consuming work, and to be accused of some sort of snobbery towards non-academics that I know neither James Clawson nor I nor any of the other Board members possess is insulting and uncalled-for. As for out-dated technology; well, yes, listserves are outdated. I subscribed to about five of them about ten years ago. As far as I know, this is the only one that is still extant. If you choose not to use social media, so be it, but I find our page to be lively and informative, and I have come to know a great number of people (most, for your information, NOT academics) from all over the world. We are investigating other forums, but I will say that the listserve has become little more than a place for you to make derogatory comments about other Durrellians and this is the main reason that I, at least, will be more than happy to see this forum go away. I promote Durrell scholarship, but I also promote general discussion on both Durrells, and if you have ever attended an OMG (I think you were in Victoria?), you would know that a number of our participants are not affiliated with universities, but are thoughtful admirers of Larry and his work. Our Society has room for all those who are interested in him, but it does NOT have room for people who are for some reason dismissive of those from one or the other "camp." The fact that I have to refer to two "camps" is a problem, and one that I never dreamed would be an issue in this Society. I realize this is not a well-written reply--I am in the middle of giving a final, which is some of that work I do to get "promoted," which means that in another three years, I'll get another $300 a year added to my salary. Having read some of your missives, I know that you will likely tear apart my writing. But I have read too many of these mean-spirited posts, and I have just had enough. This listserve is not in the spirit of genuine dialogue about a fascinating and complicated writer, and I, for one, do not mourn its passing. Sincerely, Pamela J. Francis, Vice-President, International Lawrence Durrell Society and Editor, The Lawrence Durrell Society Herald. On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 2:00 PM, > wrote: Send ILDS mailing list submissions to ilds at lists.uvic.ca To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca You can reach the person managing the list at ilds-owner at lists.uvic.ca When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of ILDS digest..." Today's Topics: 1. LISTSERV (William Apt) 2. ILDS Listserv (Bruce Redwine) 3. Re: ILDS Listserv (PETER BALDWIN) 4. Durrell in Hebrew (Rony Alfandary) 5. Re: Durrell in Hebrew (James Gifford) 6. Re: Durrell in Hebrew (Rony Alfandary) 7. Re: Durrell in Hebrew (Kennedy Gammage) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 13:33:43 -0600 From: William Apt > To: "ilds at lists.uvic.ca" > Subject: [ilds] LISTSERV Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Dearest all: I use neither Facebook nor Twitter. Does that mean that I will not be able to participate in or keep up with discussions unless I join these outlets? Billy -- WILLIAM APT Attorney at Law 812 San Antonio St, Ste 401 Austin TX 78701 512/708-8300 512/708-8011 FAX -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 15:09:30 -0800 From: Bruce Redwine > To: Sumantra Nag > Cc: Bruce Redwine > Subject: [ilds] ILDS Listserv Message-ID: <3246813F-49D5-4AD2-B80A-8453DFB964AD at gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" As a due-paying member of the ILDS, I think we need a clarification on the function of the ILDS listserv. Let me quote James Clawson, the incoming president of the ILDS, as he explains in the current Herald: In truth, we?ve been outgrowing the technology behind the listserv for a few years now, and it has with me become a distraction from the work it was meant to serve. We recommend to users that they move the discussion elsewhere? for example, to Facebook, where Pamela keeps up the public group, or to Twitter, where Charles maintains an active presence with @ DurrellSociety. With 130 members in the first of these and 1,600 followers of the latter, these groups serve far more active participants than the listserv, and they?re a vibrant means to reach outward beyond the invisible walls of what could otherwise become an echo chamber. Now, what is Clawson really saying? The listserv, to which he almost never contributed, has become a ?distraction.? (If I recall correctly, Clawson made only one brief comment re the idea of Durrell?s latent ?homosexuality.?) That is, he doesn?t want to engage in any kind of serious discussion?for whatever reason. (So the advice of one academic?time is better spent writing articles for tenure and promotion.) And what was the listserv ?meant to serve?? What is it now intended to become? Presumably a vehicle for a kind of Durrellian agitprop, which can be more effectively propagated on social networks such as Twitter and Facebook. And why did the listserv become an ?echo chamber?? Because, with one notable exception, academics never contribute to the discussions. Yes, Clawson's reasoning is circular. I don?t use social networks and never will. These are not forums for ?discussion,? as Clawson claims. They?re places for dropping one-liners and postcard impressions. I?m very suspicious of those who use these outlets. I think that they pander to the craving for fame and recognition and that they promote lazy thinking, the kind president-elect Donald Trump indulges in. Bruce -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 05:47:40 +0000 From: PETER BALDWIN > To: "ilds at lists.uvic.ca" > Subject: Re: [ilds] ILDS Listserv Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" A number of comments : 1. The ILDS needs to keep up with the times and consider how best to use social media 2. All such media are open to abuse and that, regrettably, has to be factored into our use of such media 3. If James' comments reflect a change of ILDS policy determined by the ILDS committee, I would rather it had be sent out first via The Herald for consultation. 4. Against my better judgement, I subscribe to both Facebook and Twitter. Contrary to my expectation when I subscribed to Facebook with a view to keeping in touch with far-fling family, I consider it useless. However, I have found it invaluable for special interest groups where info and photos can be shared - both helpful and enjoyable. I am still finding my feet with Twitter but, again, think it is a good forum for views on shared interest. 5. I personally would keep the list serve since there is no character limit. Hope these comments help Peter Baldwin Sent from my iPhone On 7 Dec 2016, at 23:43, Bruce Redwine >> wrote: As a due-paying member of the ILDS, I think we need a clarification on the function of the ILDS listserv. Let me quote James Clawson, the incoming president of the ILDS, as he explains in the current Herald: In truth, we've been outgrowing the technology behind the listserv for a few years now, and it has with me become a distraction from the work it was meant to serve. We recommend to users that they move the discussion elsewhere- for example, to Facebook, where Pamela keeps up the public group, or to Twitter, where Charles maintains an active presence with @ DurrellSociety. With 130 members in the first of these and 1,600 followers of the latter, these groups serve far more active participants than the listserv, and they're a vibrant means to reach outward beyond the invisible walls of what could otherwise become an echo chamber. Now, what is Clawson really saying? The listserv, to which he almost never contributed, has become a "distraction." (If I recall correctly, Clawson made only one brief comment re the idea of Durrell's latent "homosexuality.") That is, he doesn't want to engage in any kind of serious discussion-for whatever reason. (So the advice of one academic-time is better spent writing articles for tenure and promotion.) And what was the listserv "meant to serve?" What is it now intended to become? Presumably a vehicle for a kind of Durrellian agitprop, which can be more effectively propagated on social networks such as Twitter and Facebook. And why did the listserv become an "echo chamber?" Because, with one notable exception, academics never contribute to the discussions. Yes, Clawson's reasoning is circular. I don't use social networks and never will. These are not forums for "discussion," as Clawson claims. They're places for dropping one-liners and postcard impressions. I'm very suspicious of those who use these outlets. I think that they pander to the craving for fame and recognition and that they promote lazy thinking, the kind president-elect Donald Trump indulges in. Bruce _______________________________________________ ILDS mailing list ILDS at lists.uvic.ca> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 08:12:02 +0200 From: Rony Alfandary > To: Durrell List Serve > Subject: [ilds] Durrell in Hebrew Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Dear friends, I am very happy to announce the publication of my Hebrew book `Exile and Return - a Psychoanalytic study of Lawrence Durrell's The Alexandria Quartet`. It is published with Carmel Publishers Inc. which is a fine publishing house in Israel, well respected in academic circles and also well distributed. It is the first ever book written about Durrell in Hebrew (to the best of my knowledge). I hope it will be received well. in my preface to the book, I mentioned the generous encouragement and assistance I received from some members of the Society when I began the work, especially during the 2012 London conference. Best, *Rony Alfandary*, Ph.D. *Clinical Social Worker, Psychoanalytic Psychotherapist* Postgraduate Program of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy Dept. of Social Work Bar-Ilan University Ramat-Gan 51905 On 8 December 2016 at 01:09, Bruce Redwine > wrote: > As a due-paying member of the ILDS, I think we need a clarification on the > function of the ILDS listserv. Let me quote James Clawson, the incoming > president of the ILDS, as he explains in the current *Herald:* > > In truth, we?ve been outgrowing the technology behind the listserv for a > few years now, and it has with me become a distraction from the work it > was meant to serve. We recommend to users that they move the discussion > elsewhere? for example, to Facebook, where Pamela keeps up the public > group, or to Twitter, where Charles maintains an active presence with @ > DurrellSociety. With 130 members in the first of these and 1,600 followers > of the latter, these groups serve far more active participants than the > listserv, and they?re a vibrant means to reach outward beyond the invisible > walls of what could otherwise become an echo chamber. > > Now, what is Clawson really saying? The listserv, to which he almost > never contributed, has become a ?distraction.? (If I recall correctly, > Clawson made only one brief comment re the idea of Durrell?s latent > ?homosexuality.?) That is, he doesn?t want to engage in any kind of > serious discussion?for whatever reason. (So the advice of one > academic?time is better spent writing articles for tenure and promotion.) > And what was the listserv ?meant to serve?? What is it now intended to > become? Presumably a vehicle for a kind of Durrellian agitprop, which can > be more effectively propagated on social networks such as Twitter and > Facebook. And why did the listserv become an ?echo chamber?? Because, > with one notable exception, academics never contribute to the discussions. > Yes, Clawson's reasoning is circular. > I don?t use social networks and never will. These are not forums for > ?discussion,? as Clawson claims. They?re places for dropping one-liners > and postcard impressions. I?m very suspicious of those who use these > outlets. I think that they pander to the craving for fame and recognition > and that they promote lazy thinking, the kind president-elect Donald Trump > indulges in. > > Bruce > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 10:16:38 -0800 From: James Gifford > To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca Subject: Re: [ilds] Durrell in Hebrew Message-ID: <89a1d12e-ce12-f419-8590-6d9652208dbb at gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Enormous congratulations, Rony! Can you share the full details? Very best, James On 2016-12-07 10:12 PM, Rony Alfandary wrote: > > Dear friends, I am very happy to announce the publication of my Hebrew > book `Exile and Return - a Psychoanalytic study of Lawrence Durrell's > The Alexandria Quartet`. It is published with Carmel Publishers Inc. > which is a fine publishing house in Israel, well respected in academic > circles and also well distributed. It is the first ever book written > about Durrell in Hebrew (to the best of my knowledge). I hope it will be > received well. in my preface to the book, I mentioned the generous > encouragement and assistance I received from some members of the Society > when I began the work, especially during the 2012 London conference. > Best, > > *Rony Alfandary*, Ph.D. > /Clinical Social Worker, Psychoanalytic Psychotherapist/ > > Postgraduate Program of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy > > Dept. of Social Work > > Bar-Ilan University > > Ramat-Gan 51905 ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 20:25:50 +0200 From: Rony Alfandary > To: James Gifford >, Durrell List Serve > Subject: Re: [ilds] Durrell in Hebrew Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" thank you! if you look at the FB page of the society you will see the cover. i dont think you can upload images here, can you? attached is an English abstract. Was that what you meant? rony *Rony Alfandary*, Ph.D. *Clinical Social Worker, Psychoanalytic Psychotherapist* Postgraduate Program of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy Dept. of Social Work Bar-Ilan University Ramat-Gan 51905 On 8 December 2016 at 20:16, James Gifford > wrote: > Enormous congratulations, Rony! Can you share the full details? > > Very best, > James > > On 2016-12-07 10:12 PM, Rony Alfandary wrote: > >> >> Dear friends, I am very happy to announce the publication of my Hebrew >> book `Exile and Return - a Psychoanalytic study of Lawrence Durrell's >> The Alexandria Quartet`. It is published with Carmel Publishers Inc. >> which is a fine publishing house in Israel, well respected in academic >> circles and also well distributed. It is the first ever book written >> about Durrell in Hebrew (to the best of my knowledge). I hope it will be >> received well. in my preface to the book, I mentioned the generous >> encouragement and assistance I received from some members of the Society >> when I began the work, especially during the 2012 London conference. >> Best, >> >> *Rony Alfandary*, Ph.D. >> /Clinical Social Worker, Psychoanalytic Psychotherapist/ >> >> Postgraduate Program of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy >> >> Dept. of Social Work >> >> Bar-Ilan University >> >> Ramat-Gan 51905 >> > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: English abstarct.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 16527 bytes Desc: not available URL: ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 11:38:30 -0800 From: Kennedy Gammage > To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca Subject: Re: [ilds] Durrell in Hebrew Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Thank you Rony. Very interesting. The bit about Freud and Durrell reminded me of a slangy expression my friends used to say: "Who's yer daddy?" - Ken On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 10:25 AM, Rony Alfandary > wrote: > thank you! if you look at the FB page of the society you will see the > cover. i dont think you can upload images here, can you? attached is an > English abstract. > Was that what you meant? > rony > > > > > > > > > > > *Rony Alfandary*, Ph.D. > *Clinical Social Worker, Psychoanalytic Psychotherapist* > > Postgraduate Program of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy > > Dept. of Social Work > > Bar-Ilan University > > Ramat-Gan 51905 > > > > > > On 8 December 2016 at 20:16, James Gifford > > wrote: > >> Enormous congratulations, Rony! Can you share the full details? >> >> Very best, >> James >> >> On 2016-12-07 10:12 PM, Rony Alfandary wrote: >> >>> >>> Dear friends, I am very happy to announce the publication of my Hebrew >>> book `Exile and Return - a Psychoanalytic study of Lawrence Durrell's >>> The Alexandria Quartet`. It is published with Carmel Publishers Inc. >>> which is a fine publishing house in Israel, well respected in academic >>> circles and also well distributed. It is the first ever book written >>> about Durrell in Hebrew (to the best of my knowledge). I hope it will be >>> received well. in my preface to the book, I mentioned the generous >>> encouragement and assistance I received from some members of the Society >>> when I began the work, especially during the 2012 London conference. >>> Best, >>> >>> *Rony Alfandary*, Ph.D. >>> /Clinical Social Worker, Psychoanalytic Psychotherapist/ >>> >>> Postgraduate Program of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy >>> >>> Dept. of Social Work >>> >>> Bar-Ilan University >>> >>> Ramat-Gan 51905 >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> ILDS mailing list >> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds >> > > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer _______________________________________________ ILDS mailing list ILDS at lists.uvic.ca https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds ------------------------------ End of ILDS Digest, Vol 116, Issue 2 ************************************ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From gammage.kennedy at gmail.com Fri Dec 9 11:24:46 2016 From: gammage.kennedy at gmail.com (Kennedy Gammage) Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2016 11:24:46 -0800 Subject: [ilds] ILDS LISTSERV RIVALS THE ONION FOR LEVITY Message-ID: Just kidding. But I do have a point to make briefly. This is a post on the listserv from June 28th 2001: Subject: [ilds] Could Durrell really swim ??as fast as a dolphin?? So asserted the late Patrick Leigh Fermor in a 2003 interview in The Paris Review. But could this have been literal fact? Opinion on the list appears divided: Sumantra, Billy, Bruce, James, Jimmy, Panaiotis, Richard, Don, Charles, Julie, Jacob, Marc, David and Bill may be prepared to agree that Durrell was indeed a good swimmer, while Grove, Jim, Anna, Roy, Anne, Pamela, Sumantha, Rui, Gulshan, Sharbani, Leena, Ilyas, Merrianne and Yael likely feel that some poetic license was invoked. Brewster, Lee, John, Tib, Anthony, Frederic, Paul, Ed, Rony, Joan, DrD, Peter, Julia, Dorothy, Allyson, Christine and Sandy are keeping an open mind. New topic: was Larry truly proficient on the ocarina? Bruce says probably. - Ken OK ? so you didn?t LOL. My point is ? look at the number of names I mentioned! These were all active on the listserv - and some of us still are, but only a fraction. So the question is ? what happened? Is it all Bruce?s fault? Don?t believe it ? all my friend Bruce and I (and many others) crave is some informed discussion about matters that matter to us, over a forum ideally suited to it! But there has been virtually no discussion recently - and now the ILDS wants to shut the listserv down! Why should this have happened? Yes - some key players like Bill left us. The technology is a decade old...but it still works. It is digital not analog. Does the forum really need to be moderated? I want to call out James Gifford for the highest praise for doing all he has done. He has selflessly passed-through any and all LD-related posts even if some of them were personally hard to take. But if they all were passed through, couldn?t an up-to-date Spam Filter take care of the rest? That?s all for now. Much respect to everyone in our group - Ken -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Ric.Wilson at msn.com Fri Dec 9 14:41:29 2016 From: Ric.Wilson at msn.com (Ric Wilson) Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2016 22:41:29 +0000 Subject: [ilds] IN REPLY TO #7 , Vol 116, Issue 3 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: re: Message SEVEN Hi GR Taneja--Let me add to your respectful endorsement [ "Dear Pamela" ] that your sense of balance spoke to me. I'll be blunt, I don't always get it here. But devils can form on any listserv, hypothetically speaking here of course, with that self-aggrandizing voice bent on beguiling authority as did Milton's Lucifer; so we must distinguish our places, pushing back if you will, for the better in this asynchronous co-creation thing we got going on . I found myself commentless-- not so long ago in heaven's name--and gave a "pssst" to Robin; hey, we need moderators, right? Every member here--dearly beloved Bruce, too--stimulated me to reflect, check myself before hitting Send . That's good cause reflecting means forward in time, right? As for my academy's jewels and dear Pam, they compelled careful reflection, too. As did Poe's speaker turning on that bust of Pallas Athene in "Raven," Darley's passing for me anyway spoke emphatically to the end of seeing personal detachment as imperative , not an option. I'd appeal to any naysayers, draw no conclusions. Remember mine eyes have seen the mountain top as MLK put it in his oratory fashion. Even Blake wrote somewhere, if the Sun were to Doubt, it'd go out! Showing your perspective as earned through experience had me. What would my Susan Aiken say were it revealed that pre-summer session crammed into two-and-half weeks--a Women's Studies [Literature] course--was timeless? I can't answer that, but it's relentless and unspeakable. I know this is informal setting-- MOOC-y--by comparison, but that's my piece. All the best, Ric Wilson ________________________________ From: ILDS on behalf of ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca Sent: Friday, December 9, 2016 1:00 PM To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca Subject: ILDS Digest, Vol 116, Issue 3 ***** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From timlot at comcast.net Fri Dec 9 16:13:02 2016 From: timlot at comcast.net (Merrianne Timko) Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2016 18:13:02 -0600 Subject: [ilds] ILDS Digest, Vol 116, Issue 2 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <005a01d2527a$3cb1f8f0$b615ead0$@comcast.net> I would like to see a better integration of academics and non-academics, not only on the List Serv but at OMG. In fact, it would be nice to abolish this perceived segregation of academics and non-academics frequently perpetuated on the List Serv. We all share an interest in Durrell, regardless of our backgrounds. Some of us are accomplished professionals or academics from non-literary fields who enjoy pursuing our personal research regarding Durrell. The List Serv should help advance these pursuits, rather than serve to regurgitate the same topics previously discussed, over and over again. Perhaps it would be possible to use the Subject line to categorize queries and responses according to subject or topic, similar to the idea of a controlled vocabulary? Merrianne Timko From: ILDS [mailto:ilds-bounces at lists.uvic.ca] On Behalf Of Pamela Francis Sent: Friday, December 09, 2016 9:43 AM To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca Subject: Re: [ilds] ILDS Digest, Vol 116, Issue 2 subject: Bruce Redwine's comments: >That is, he doesn?t want to engage in any kind of > serious discussion?for whatever reason. (So the advice of one > academic?time is better spent writing articles for tenure and promotion.) To Bruce and other members of the listserve: Mr. Redwine's comment is exactly the kind of statement that indicates that this listserve has become a forum for personal grievances rather than any sort of useful discussion. I don't know what you have against people who do academic work, Bruce, but I refuse to even take part in a forum where the very nature of my life's work is somehow considered to be so much blather. No one has ever, to my knowledge (though admittedly, I don't use this forum for the reason stated) said that you don't have any sort of validity in your research just because you are not an academic; however, I do not see the same respect for those of us who do make our living by teaching. You have no idea what teaching in a university in the US is like now--tenure barely even exists, and James Clawson and I both teach in institutions where research and publishing are secondary to the instructional components of our job. It is hard work, and time-consuming work, and to be accused of some sort of snobbery towards non-academics that I know neither James Clawson nor I nor any of the other Board members possess is insulting and uncalled-for. As for out-dated technology; well, yes, listserves are outdated. I subscribed to about five of them about ten years ago. As far as I know, this is the only one that is still extant. If you choose not to use social media, so be it, but I find our page to be lively and informative, and I have come to know a great number of people (most, for your information, NOT academics) from all over the world. We are investigating other forums, but I will say that the listserve has become little more than a place for you to make derogatory comments about other Durrellians and this is the main reason that I, at least, will be more than happy to see this forum go away. I promote Durrell scholarship, but I also promote general discussion on both Durrells, and if you have ever attended an OMG (I think you were in Victoria?), you would know that a number of our participants are not affiliated with universities, but are thoughtful admirers of Larry and his work. Our Society has room for all those who are interested in him, but it does NOT have room for people who are for some reason dismissive of those from one or the other "camp." The fact that I have to refer to two "camps" is a problem, and one that I never dreamed would be an issue in this Society. I realize this is not a well-written reply--I am in the middle of giving a final, which is some of that work I do to get "promoted," which means that in another three years, I'll get another $300 a year added to my salary. Having read some of your missives, I know that you will likely tear apart my writing. But I have read too many of these mean-spirited posts, and I have just had enough. This listserve is not in the spirit of genuine dialogue about a fascinating and complicated writer, and I, for one, do not mourn its passing. Sincerely, Pamela J. Francis, Vice-President, International Lawrence Durrell Society and Editor, The Lawrence Durrell Society Herald. On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 2:00 PM, > wrote: Send ILDS mailing list submissions to ilds at lists.uvic.ca To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca You can reach the person managing the list at ilds-owner at lists.uvic.ca When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of ILDS digest..." Today's Topics: 1. LISTSERV (William Apt) 2. ILDS Listserv (Bruce Redwine) 3. Re: ILDS Listserv (PETER BALDWIN) 4. Durrell in Hebrew (Rony Alfandary) 5. Re: Durrell in Hebrew (James Gifford) 6. Re: Durrell in Hebrew (Rony Alfandary) 7. Re: Durrell in Hebrew (Kennedy Gammage) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 13:33:43 -0600 From: William Apt > To: "ilds at lists.uvic.ca " > Subject: [ilds] LISTSERV Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Dearest all: I use neither Facebook nor Twitter. Does that mean that I will not be able to participate in or keep up with discussions unless I join these outlets? Billy -- WILLIAM APT Attorney at Law 812 San Antonio St, Ste 401 Austin TX 78701 512/708-8300 512/708-8011 FAX -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 15:09:30 -0800 From: Bruce Redwine > To: Sumantra Nag > Cc: Bruce Redwine > Subject: [ilds] ILDS Listserv Message-ID: <3246813F-49D5-4AD2-B80A-8453DFB964AD at gmail.com > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" As a due-paying member of the ILDS, I think we need a clarification on the function of the ILDS listserv. Let me quote James Clawson, the incoming president of the ILDS, as he explains in the current Herald: In truth, we?ve been outgrowing the technology behind the listserv for a few years now, and it has with me become a distraction from the work it was meant to serve. We recommend to users that they move the discussion elsewhere? for example, to Facebook, where Pamela keeps up the public group, or to Twitter, where Charles maintains an active presence with @ DurrellSociety. With 130 members in the first of these and 1,600 followers of the latter, these groups serve far more active participants than the listserv, and they?re a vibrant means to reach outward beyond the invisible walls of what could otherwise become an echo chamber. Now, what is Clawson really saying? The listserv, to which he almost never contributed, has become a ?distraction.? (If I recall correctly, Clawson made only one brief comment re the idea of Durrell?s latent ?homosexuality.?) That is, he doesn?t want to engage in any kind of serious discussion?for whatever reason. (So the advice of one academic?time is better spent writing articles for tenure and promotion.) And what was the listserv ?meant to serve?? What is it now intended to become? Presumably a vehicle for a kind of Durrellian agitprop, which can be more effectively propagated on social networks such as Twitter and Facebook. And why did the listserv become an ?echo chamber?? Because, with one notable exception, academics never contribute to the discussions. Yes, Clawson's reasoning is circular. I don?t use social networks and never will. These are not forums for ?discussion,? as Clawson claims. They?re places for dropping one-liners and postcard impressions. I?m very suspicious of those who use these outlets. I think that they pander to the craving for fame and recognition and that they promote lazy thinking, the kind president-elect Donald Trump indulges in. Bruce -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 05:47:40 +0000 From: PETER BALDWIN > To: "ilds at lists.uvic.ca " > Subject: Re: [ilds] ILDS Listserv Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" A number of comments : 1. The ILDS needs to keep up with the times and consider how best to use social media 2. All such media are open to abuse and that, regrettably, has to be factored into our use of such media 3. If James' comments reflect a change of ILDS policy determined by the ILDS committee, I would rather it had be sent out first via The Herald for consultation. 4. Against my better judgement, I subscribe to both Facebook and Twitter. Contrary to my expectation when I subscribed to Facebook with a view to keeping in touch with far-fling family, I consider it useless. However, I have found it invaluable for special interest groups where info and photos can be shared - both helpful and enjoyable. I am still finding my feet with Twitter but, again, think it is a good forum for views on shared interest. 5. I personally would keep the list serve since there is no character limit. Hope these comments help Peter Baldwin Sent from my iPhone On 7 Dec 2016, at 23:43, Bruce Redwine >> wrote: As a due-paying member of the ILDS, I think we need a clarification on the function of the ILDS listserv. Let me quote James Clawson, the incoming president of the ILDS, as he explains in the current Herald: In truth, we've been outgrowing the technology behind the listserv for a few years now, and it has with me become a distraction from the work it was meant to serve. We recommend to users that they move the discussion elsewhere- for example, to Facebook, where Pamela keeps up the public group, or to Twitter, where Charles maintains an active presence with @ DurrellSociety. With 130 members in the first of these and 1,600 followers of the latter, these groups serve far more active participants than the listserv, and they're a vibrant means to reach outward beyond the invisible walls of what could otherwise become an echo chamber. Now, what is Clawson really saying? The listserv, to which he almost never contributed, has become a "distraction." (If I recall correctly, Clawson made only one brief comment re the idea of Durrell's latent "homosexuality.") That is, he doesn't want to engage in any kind of serious discussion-for whatever reason. (So the advice of one academic-time is better spent writing articles for tenure and promotion.) And what was the listserv "meant to serve?" What is it now intended to become? Presumably a vehicle for a kind of Durrellian agitprop, which can be more effectively propagated on social networks such as Twitter and Facebook. And why did the listserv become an "echo chamber?" Because, with one notable exception, academics never contribute to the discussions. Yes, Clawson's reasoning is circular. I don't use social networks and never will. These are not forums for "discussion," as Clawson claims. They're places for dropping one-liners and postcard impressions. I'm very suspicious of those who use these outlets. I think that they pander to the craving for fame and recognition and that they promote lazy thinking, the kind president-elect Donald Trump indulges in. Bruce _______________________________________________ ILDS mailing list ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Message: 4 Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 08:12:02 +0200 From: Rony Alfandary > To: Durrell List Serve > Subject: [ilds] Durrell in Hebrew Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Dear friends, I am very happy to announce the publication of my Hebrew book `Exile and Return - a Psychoanalytic study of Lawrence Durrell's The Alexandria Quartet`. It is published with Carmel Publishers Inc. which is a fine publishing house in Israel, well respected in academic circles and also well distributed. It is the first ever book written about Durrell in Hebrew (to the best of my knowledge). I hope it will be received well. in my preface to the book, I mentioned the generous encouragement and assistance I received from some members of the Society when I began the work, especially during the 2012 London conference. Best, *Rony Alfandary*, Ph.D. *Clinical Social Worker, Psychoanalytic Psychotherapist* Postgraduate Program of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy Dept. of Social Work Bar-Ilan University Ramat-Gan 51905 On 8 December 2016 at 01:09, Bruce Redwine > wrote: > As a due-paying member of the ILDS, I think we need a clarification on the > function of the ILDS listserv. Let me quote James Clawson, the incoming > president of the ILDS, as he explains in the current *Herald:* > > In truth, we?ve been outgrowing the technology behind the listserv for a > few years now, and it has with me become a distraction from the work it > was meant to serve. We recommend to users that they move the discussion > elsewhere? for example, to Facebook, where Pamela keeps up the public > group, or to Twitter, where Charles maintains an active presence with @ > DurrellSociety. With 130 members in the first of these and 1,600 followers > of the latter, these groups serve far more active participants than the > listserv, and they?re a vibrant means to reach outward beyond the invisible > walls of what could otherwise become an echo chamber. > > Now, what is Clawson really saying? The listserv, to which he almost > never contributed, has become a ?distraction.? (If I recall correctly, > Clawson made only one brief comment re the idea of Durrell?s latent > ?homosexuality.?) That is, he doesn?t want to engage in any kind of > serious discussion?for whatever reason. (So the advice of one > academic?time is better spent writing articles for tenure and promotion.) > And what was the listserv ?meant to serve?? What is it now intended to > become? Presumably a vehicle for a kind of Durrellian agitprop, which can > be more effectively propagated on social networks such as Twitter and > Facebook. And why did the listserv become an ?echo chamber?? Because, > with one notable exception, academics never contribute to the discussions. > Yes, Clawson's reasoning is circular. > I don?t use social networks and never will. These are not forums for > ?discussion,? as Clawson claims. They?re places for dropping one-liners > and postcard impressions. I?m very suspicious of those who use these > outlets. I think that they pander to the craving for fame and recognition > and that they promote lazy thinking, the kind president-elect Donald Trump > indulges in. > > Bruce > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Message: 5 Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 10:16:38 -0800 From: James Gifford > To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca Subject: Re: [ilds] Durrell in Hebrew Message-ID: <89a1d12e-ce12-f419-8590-6d9652208dbb at gmail.com > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Enormous congratulations, Rony! Can you share the full details? Very best, James On 2016-12-07 10:12 PM, Rony Alfandary wrote: > > Dear friends, I am very happy to announce the publication of my Hebrew > book `Exile and Return - a Psychoanalytic study of Lawrence Durrell's > The Alexandria Quartet`. It is published with Carmel Publishers Inc. > which is a fine publishing house in Israel, well respected in academic > circles and also well distributed. It is the first ever book written > about Durrell in Hebrew (to the best of my knowledge). I hope it will be > received well. in my preface to the book, I mentioned the generous > encouragement and assistance I received from some members of the Society > when I began the work, especially during the 2012 London conference. > Best, > > *Rony Alfandary*, Ph.D. > /Clinical Social Worker, Psychoanalytic Psychotherapist/ > > Postgraduate Program of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy > > Dept. of Social Work > > Bar-Ilan University > > Ramat-Gan 51905 ------------------------------ Message: 6 Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 20:25:50 +0200 From: Rony Alfandary > To: James Gifford >, Durrell List Serve > Subject: Re: [ilds] Durrell in Hebrew Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" thank you! if you look at the FB page of the society you will see the cover. i dont think you can upload images here, can you? attached is an English abstract. Was that what you meant? rony *Rony Alfandary*, Ph.D. *Clinical Social Worker, Psychoanalytic Psychotherapist* Postgraduate Program of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy Dept. of Social Work Bar-Ilan University Ramat-Gan 51905 On 8 December 2016 at 20:16, James Gifford > wrote: > Enormous congratulations, Rony! Can you share the full details? > > Very best, > James > > On 2016-12-07 10:12 PM, Rony Alfandary wrote: > >> >> Dear friends, I am very happy to announce the publication of my Hebrew >> book `Exile and Return - a Psychoanalytic study of Lawrence Durrell's >> The Alexandria Quartet`. It is published with Carmel Publishers Inc. >> which is a fine publishing house in Israel, well respected in academic >> circles and also well distributed. It is the first ever book written >> about Durrell in Hebrew (to the best of my knowledge). I hope it will be >> received well. in my preface to the book, I mentioned the generous >> encouragement and assistance I received from some members of the Society >> when I began the work, especially during the 2012 London conference. >> Best, >> >> *Rony Alfandary*, Ph.D. >> /Clinical Social Worker, Psychoanalytic Psychotherapist/ >> >> Postgraduate Program of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy >> >> Dept. of Social Work >> >> Bar-Ilan University >> >> Ramat-Gan 51905 >> > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: English abstarct.docx Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document Size: 16527 bytes Desc: not available URL: ------------------------------ Message: 7 Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 11:38:30 -0800 From: Kennedy Gammage > To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca Subject: Re: [ilds] Durrell in Hebrew Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Thank you Rony. Very interesting. The bit about Freud and Durrell reminded me of a slangy expression my friends used to say: "Who's yer daddy?" - Ken On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 10:25 AM, Rony Alfandary > wrote: > thank you! if you look at the FB page of the society you will see the > cover. i dont think you can upload images here, can you? attached is an > English abstract. > Was that what you meant? > rony > > > > > > > > > > > *Rony Alfandary*, Ph.D. > *Clinical Social Worker, Psychoanalytic Psychotherapist* > > Postgraduate Program of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy > > Dept. of Social Work > > Bar-Ilan University > > Ramat-Gan 51905 > > > > > > On 8 December 2016 at 20:16, James Gifford > > wrote: > >> Enormous congratulations, Rony! Can you share the full details? >> >> Very best, >> James >> >> On 2016-12-07 10:12 PM, Rony Alfandary wrote: >> >>> >>> Dear friends, I am very happy to announce the publication of my Hebrew >>> book `Exile and Return - a Psychoanalytic study of Lawrence Durrell's >>> The Alexandria Quartet`. It is published with Carmel Publishers Inc. >>> which is a fine publishing house in Israel, well respected in academic >>> circles and also well distributed. It is the first ever book written >>> about Durrell in Hebrew (to the best of my knowledge). I hope it will be >>> received well. in my preface to the book, I mentioned the generous >>> encouragement and assistance I received from some members of the Society >>> when I began the work, especially during the 2012 London conference. >>> Best, >>> >>> *Rony Alfandary*, Ph.D. >>> /Clinical Social Worker, Psychoanalytic Psychotherapist/ >>> >>> Postgraduate Program of Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy >>> >>> Dept. of Social Work >>> >>> Bar-Ilan University >>> >>> Ramat-Gan 51905 >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> ILDS mailing list >> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds >> > > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer _______________________________________________ ILDS mailing list ILDS at lists.uvic.ca https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds ------------------------------ End of ILDS Digest, Vol 116, Issue 2 ************************************ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Fri Dec 9 17:07:29 2016 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2016 17:07:29 -0800 Subject: [ilds] The Function of the ILDS Listserv In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Pamela Francis and G. R. Taneja: Thanks for your two responses. First, let?s avoid the red herring about the difficulties of pursuing an academic career. Which I do not dispute. Let?s stick to the topic of what has become of the ILDS listserv and all its implications. Perhaps I idealize, but I see it as a forum for discussing issues related to Lawrence Durrell in depth. A place to test ideas and to see what works and what doesn?t. That precedent was set back in 2007 (?), during a moderated (and highly successful) close reading of Justine. The ILDS moderators were James Gifford, Charles Sligh, and Bill Godshalk. They were all excellent, and they were all academics. Gifford and Sligh provided detailed commentary. Godshalk was pithy and humorous. But they all participated?and that's my main point. Do we see such participation today? No (with one or two exceptions). That?s a fact. Am I advocating a return to the culture of 2007? No. My model is Bill Godshalk, who was (now sadly gone) a very busy and productive scholar of great worth. In his unique style, Bill listened, commented, prodded, and kept the discussions going. He was undoubtedly a fine teacher in the Socratic tradition. Does such participation involve a lot of extra work? Although possibly wrong, I don?t think so, unless one is stimulated to greater involvement. I don?t expect the list to ever repeat the success of 2007. Some crude ?simulacrum,? however, can be attempted. Last year a reading of Tunc took place. Two, what?s the situation today? Above all, praise goes to James Gifford for his tireless moderation of the list?s remnants. Now, James Clawson mischaracterizes the ILDS listserv as a ?distraction? and an ?echo chamber,? which I take personally offensive, and he uses the Society?s newsletter to publish his views. In doing so, he promulgates official policy. If challenging this characterization is an ad hominem attack, then this forum has indeed ceased to be a place for ?any sort of useful discussion.? I?ve always thought of the Academy as a place for open debate. The fact that both of you disagree with my challenge, strongly suggests to me that you believe the general membership of the ILDS should pay their annual dues, sit quietly, and not complain as policy is determined by a select few. For another opinion, I suggest you read Peter Baldwin?s email of 7 December 2016, item no. 3 in particular. On this point, I completely agree with Peter. Three, is the ILDS a democracy or an oligarchy? I think it?s run like the latter. But this is a matter of the bylaws. Perhaps a lawyer can comment. I realize that institutions like corporations are not democracies (so I was informed by an SVP when I worked in one). Does the ILDS fit this pattern? Is the Executive Committee (ExCom) too satisfied with its plenary powers? Hence, no need to consult and no need to justify itself? I nominated someone for ExCom, but I was never informed of what happened to my nomination, which, as I eventually learned, went nowhere or possibly into the trashcan. I would like to see, in the jargon of the day, more ?transparency.? For example, are the minutes of ExCom meetings taken? If so, why aren?t they circulated via the list and why aren?t comments solicited? Generally, I find ExCom unresponsive, as illustrated by two previously emails by others on this topic, which, so far, have gone unanswered. It seems that the only way to get a response is to be blunt, of which I am guilty. Four, for all the reason stated above and previously, I do not agree that the ILDS listserv is antiquated and useless. As to the value of Twitter and Facebook as vehicles for ?discussing? Lawrence Durrell, I?ve already stated my views in a previous email. They have not changed. In brief, I see those outlets as a diminution of Durrellian studies. I?ll not participate in them, and I see no point in pandering to the whims of current social media. Yes, I?m an old fogey. Clarifications One, to be clear, I did not make up the story of academics saving their ideas for articles, which Pamela Francis apparently inflated into an attack on her profession. That anecdote originated as an exchange between two academics, one of whom reported it to me. I take it as true. From what I know of academia and the years spent in it, I think that story patently true. Two, I do not hold academia in contempt. That innuendo is another red herring. To the contrary, I value the Academy highly. You, Pamela Francis, are confusing debate with conflict?which surprises me, given your profession and what it values, the free exchange of ideas. You are also indulging in the kind of mischaracterization previously reserved for the ILDS listserv. I am not an academic, but I am on Academia.edu. I don?t have a title and institutional identification, as you do, but my CV and articles can be downloaded at the website. My recent essay is entitled, ?The Ancient Egyptian Context of The Alexandria Quartet,? Mosaic 49.3 (2016): 71-90. So let the debate continue, Bruce > On Dec 9, 2016, at 7:43 AM, Pamela Francis wrote: > > subject: Bruce Redwine's comments: > > >That is, he doesn?t want to engage in any kind of > > serious discussion?for whatever reason. (So the advice of one > > academic?time is better spent writing articles for tenure and promotion.) > > To Bruce and other members of the listserve: > > Mr. Redwine's comment is exactly the kind of statement that indicates that this listserve has become a forum for personal grievances rather than any sort of useful discussion. I don't know what you have against people who do academic work, Bruce, but I refuse to even take part in a forum where the very nature of my life's work is somehow considered to be so much blather. No one has ever, to my knowledge (though admittedly, I don't use this forum for the reason stated) said that you don't have any sort of validity in your research just because you are not an academic; however, I do not see the same respect for those of us who do make our living by teaching. You have no idea what teaching in a university in the US is like now--tenure barely even exists, and James Clawson and I both teach in institutions where research and publishing are secondary to the instructional components of our job. It is hard work, and time-consuming work, and to be accused of some sort of snobbery towards non-academics that I know neither James Clawson nor I nor any of the other Board members possess is insulting and uncalled-for. > > As for out-dated technology; well, yes, listserves are outdated. I subscribed to about five of them about ten years ago. As far as I know, this is the only one that is still extant. If you choose not to use social media, so be it, but I find our page to be lively and informative, and I have come to know a great number of people (most, for your information, NOT academics) from all over the world. We are investigating other forums, but I will say that the listserve has become little more than a place for you to make derogatory comments about other Durrellians and this is the main reason that I, at least, will be more than happy to see this forum go away. > > I promote Durrell scholarship, but I also promote general discussion on both Durrells, and if you have ever attended an OMG (I think you were in Victoria?), you would know that a number of our participants are not affiliated with universities, but are thoughtful admirers of Larry and his work. Our Society has room for all those who are interested in him, but it does NOT have room for people who are for some reason dismissive of those from one or the other "camp." The fact that I have to refer to two "camps" is a problem, and one that I never dreamed would be an issue in this Society. > > I realize this is not a well-written reply--I am in the middle of giving a final, which is some of that work I do to get "promoted," which means that in another three years, I'll get another $300 a year added to my salary. Having read some of your missives, I know that you will likely tear apart my writing. But I have read too many of these mean-spirited posts, and I have just had enough. This listserve is not in the spirit of genuine dialogue about a fascinating and complicated writer, and I, for one, do not mourn its passing. > > Sincerely, > Pamela J. Francis, Vice-President, International Lawrence Durrell Society and Editor, The Lawrence Durrell Society Herald. > > On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 2:00 PM, > wrote: > Send ILDS mailing list submissions to > ilds at lists.uvic.ca > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca > > You can reach the person managing the list at > ilds-owner at lists.uvic.ca > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific > than "Re: Contents of ILDS digest..." > > > Today's Topics: > > 1. LISTSERV (William Apt) > 2. ILDS Listserv (Bruce Redwine) > 3. Re: ILDS Listserv (PETER BALDWIN) > 4. Durrell in Hebrew (Rony Alfandary) > 5. Re: Durrell in Hebrew (James Gifford) > 6. Re: Durrell in Hebrew (Rony Alfandary) > 7. Re: Durrell in Hebrew (Kennedy Gammage) > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Message: 1 > Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 13:33:43 -0600 > From: William Apt > > To: "ilds at lists.uvic.ca " > > Subject: [ilds] LISTSERV > Message-ID: > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > Dearest all: > > I use neither Facebook nor Twitter. Does that mean that I will not be able > to participate in or keep up > with discussions unless I join these outlets? > > Billy > -- > WILLIAM APT > Attorney at Law > 812 San Antonio St, Ste 401 > Austin TX 78701 > 512/708-8300 > 512/708-8011 FAX > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 2 > Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 15:09:30 -0800 > From: Bruce Redwine > > To: Sumantra Nag > > Cc: Bruce Redwine > > Subject: [ilds] ILDS Listserv > Message-ID: <3246813F-49D5-4AD2-B80A-8453DFB964AD at gmail.com > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" > > As a due-paying member of the ILDS, I think we need a clarification on the function of the ILDS listserv. Let me quote James Clawson, the incoming president of the ILDS, as he explains in the current Herald: > In truth, we?ve been outgrowing the technology behind the listserv for a few years now, and it has with me become a distraction from the work it was meant to serve. We recommend to users that they move the discussion elsewhere? for example, to Facebook, where Pamela keeps up the public group, or to Twitter, where Charles maintains an active presence with @ DurrellSociety. With 130 members in the first of these and 1,600 followers of the latter, these groups serve far more active participants than the listserv, and they?re a vibrant means to reach outward beyond the invisible walls of what could otherwise become an echo chamber. > > Now, what is Clawson really saying? The listserv, to which he almost never contributed, has become a ?distraction.? (If I recall correctly, Clawson made only one brief comment re the idea of Durrell?s latent ?homosexuality.?) That is, he doesn?t want to engage in any kind of serious discussion?for whatever reason. (So the advice of one academic?time is better spent writing articles for tenure and promotion.) And what was the listserv ?meant to serve?? What is it now intended to become? Presumably a vehicle for a kind of Durrellian agitprop, which can be more effectively propagated on social networks such as Twitter and Facebook. And why did the listserv become an ?echo chamber?? Because, with one notable exception, academics never contribute to the discussions. Yes, Clawson's reasoning is circular. > > I don?t use social networks and never will. These are not forums for ?discussion,? as Clawson claims. They?re places for dropping one-liners and postcard impressions. I?m very suspicious of those who use these outlets. I think that they pander to the craving for fame and recognition and that they promote lazy thinking, the kind president-elect Donald Trump indulges in. > > Bruce > -------------- next part -------------- > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... > URL: > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 3 > Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 05:47:40 +0000 > From: PETER BALDWIN > > To: "ilds at lists.uvic.ca " > > Subject: Re: [ilds] ILDS Listserv > Message-ID: > > > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > A number of comments : > > 1. The ILDS needs to keep up with the times and consider how best to use social media > > 2. All such media are open to abuse and that, regrettably, has to be factored into our use of such media > > 3. If James' comments reflect a change of ILDS policy determined by the ILDS committee, I would rather it had be sent out first via The Herald for consultation. > > 4. Against my better judgement, I subscribe to both Facebook and Twitter. Contrary to my expectation when I subscribed to Facebook with a view to keeping in touch with far-fling family, I consider it useless. However, I have found it invaluable for special interest groups where info and photos can be shared - both helpful and enjoyable. I am still finding my feet with Twitter but, again, think it is a good forum for views on shared interest. > > 5. I personally would keep the list serve since there is no character limit. > > Hope these comments help > > Peter Baldwin > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 7 Dec 2016, at 23:43, Bruce Redwine >> wrote: > > As a due-paying member of the ILDS, I think we need a clarification on the function of the ILDS listserv. Let me quote James Clawson, the incoming president of the ILDS, as he explains in the current Herald: > > In truth, we've been outgrowing the technology behind the listserv for a few years now, and it has with me become a distraction from the work it was meant to serve. We recommend to users that they move the discussion elsewhere- for example, to Facebook, where Pamela keeps up the public group, or to Twitter, where Charles maintains an active presence with @ DurrellSociety. With 130 members in the first of these and 1,600 followers of the latter, these groups serve far more active participants than the listserv, and they're a vibrant means to reach outward beyond the invisible walls of what could otherwise become an echo chamber. > > Now, what is Clawson really saying? The listserv, to which he almost never contributed, has become a "distraction." (If I recall correctly, Clawson made only one brief comment re the idea of Durrell's latent "homosexuality.") That is, he doesn't want to engage in any kind of serious discussion-for whatever reason. (So the advice of one academic-time is better spent writing articles for tenure and promotion.) And what was the listserv "meant to serve?" What is it now intended to become? Presumably a vehicle for a kind of Durrellian agitprop, which can be more effectively propagated on social networks such as Twitter and Facebook. And why did the listserv become an "echo chamber?" Because, with one notable exception, academics never contribute to the discussions. Yes, Clawson's reasoning is circular. > > I don't use social networks and never will. These are not forums for "discussion," as Clawson claims. They're places for dropping one-liners and postcard impressions. I'm very suspicious of those who use these outlets. I think that they pander to the craving for fame and recognition and that they promote lazy thinking, the kind president-elect Donald Trump indulges in. > > Bruce -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From delospeter at hotmail.com Fri Dec 9 19:08:07 2016 From: delospeter at hotmail.com (PETER BALDWIN) Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2016 03:08:07 +0000 Subject: [ilds] listserv utility In-Reply-To: References: , Message-ID: Thank you, Jamie, for responding. If I have any more thoughts, I think I will add them to a personal email to you, cc Pamela - I owe you both replies to your personal emails to me on this and another (unrelated) topic but family illness limits my time to do so - apologies for the delay in this respect Peter Sent from my iPhone > On 9 Dec 2016, at 05:14, Bruce Redwine wrote: > > I think a greater concern is the characterization of the listserv as a "distraction" in need of replacement. > > Bruce > > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Dec 8, 2016, at 8:21 PM, PETER BALDWIN wrote: >> >> I would be very fearful if the ILDS list serve was not moderated given the personal nature of some comments posted in the past. I do not know if 'our' forum is unusual in this respect. >> >> Peter >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >>> On 8 Dec 2016, at 21:47, Robin Collins wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I am on several listservs (and I moderate one). It is very clear that listservs serve very different functions than does FB or twitter, etc. They enable longer and more considered discussion (including debate) of topics of interest to subscribers. >>> If the problem is not having a moderator that can put in the time of moderating, then the list could be converted to unmoderated. Subscribers can still receive content immediately or in an accumulated format (I use accumulated). >>> I like the current setup (if anyone was asking). >>> >>> Robin >>> _______________________________________________ >>> ILDS mailing list >>> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >>> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds >> >> _______________________________________________ >> ILDS mailing list >> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca >> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds From zahlan at earthlink.net Sat Dec 10 13:23:46 2016 From: zahlan at earthlink.net (Anne Zahlan) Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2016 16:23:46 -0500 Subject: [ilds] The Function of the ILDS Listserv In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <000601d2532b$b16e2310$144a6930$@earthlink.net> Among the many complaints expressed by Mr. Redwine was the following: I nominated someone for ExCom, but I was never informed of what happened to my nomination, which, as I eventually learned, went nowhere or possibly into the trashcan. I am reliably informed by the chair of the nominations committee that Mr. Redwine?s nomination, as all others, was acknowledged with thanks. Of course, the committee appropriately considered all nominations, considered which candidates had more nominations than others, and discussed experience and qualifications of all before making a decision. From: ILDS [mailto:ilds-bounces at lists.uvic.ca] On Behalf Of Bruce Redwine Sent: Friday, December 9, 2016 8:07 PM To: Sumantra Nag Cc: Bruce Redwine Subject: [ilds] The Function of the ILDS Listserv Dear Pamela Francis and G. R. Taneja: Thanks for your two responses. First, let?s avoid the red herring about the difficulties of pursuing an academic career. Which I do not dispute. Let?s stick to the topic of what has become of the ILDS listserv and all its implications. Perhaps I idealize, but I see it as a forum for discussing issues related to Lawrence Durrell in depth. A place to test ideas and to see what works and what doesn?t. That precedent was set back in 2007 (?), during a moderated (and highly successful) close reading of Justine. The ILDS moderators were James Gifford, Charles Sligh, and Bill Godshalk. They were all excellent, and they were all academics. Gifford and Sligh provided detailed commentary. Godshalk was pithy and humorous. But they all participated?and that's my main point. Do we see such participation today? No (with one or two exceptions). That?s a fact. Am I advocating a return to the culture of 2007? No. My model is Bill Godshalk, who was (now sadly gone) a very busy and productive scholar of great worth. In his unique style, Bill listened, commented, prodded, and kept the discussions going. He was undoubtedly a fine teacher in the Socratic tradition. Does such participation involve a lot of extra work? Although possibly wrong, I don?t think so, unless one is stimulated to greater involvement. I don?t expect the list to ever repeat the success of 2007. Some crude ?simulacrum,? however, can be attempted. Last year a reading of Tunc took place. Two, what?s the situation today? Above all, praise goes to James Gifford for his tireless moderation of the list?s remnants. Now, James Clawson mischaracterizes the ILDS listserv as a ?distraction? and an ?echo chamber,? which I take personally offensive, and he uses the Society?s newsletter to publish his views. In doing so, he promulgates official policy. If challenging this characterization is an ad hominem attack, then this forum has indeed ceased to be a place for ?any sort of useful discussion.? I?ve always thought of the Academy as a place for open debate. The fact that both of you disagree with my challenge, strongly suggests to me that you believe the general membership of the ILDS should pay their annual dues, sit quietly, and not complain as policy is determined by a select few. For another opinion, I suggest you read Peter Baldwin?s email of 7 December 2016, item no. 3 in particular. On this point, I completely agree with Peter. Three, is the ILDS a democracy or an oligarchy? I think it?s run like the latter. But this is a matter of the bylaws. Perhaps a lawyer can comment. I realize that institutions like corporations are not democracies (so I was informed by an SVP when I worked in one). Does the ILDS fit this pattern? Is the Executive Committee (ExCom) too satisfied with its plenary powers? Hence, no need to consult and no need to justify itself? I nominated someone for ExCom, but I was never informed of what happened to my nomination, which, as I eventually learned, went nowhere or possibly into the trashcan. I would like to see, in the jargon of the day, more ?transparency.? For example, are the minutes of ExCom meetings taken? If so, why aren?t they circulated via the list and why aren?t comments solicited? Generally, I find ExCom unresponsive, as illustrated by two previously emails by others on this topic, which, so far, have gone unanswered. It seems that the only way to get a response is to be blunt, of which I am guilty. Four, for all the reason stated above and previously, I do not agree that the ILDS listserv is antiquated and useless. As to the value of Twitter and Facebook as vehicles for ?discussing? Lawrence Durrell, I?ve already stated my views in a previous email. They have not changed. In brief, I see those outlets as a diminution of Durrellian studies. I?ll not participate in them, and I see no point in pandering to the whims of current social media. Yes, I?m an old fogey. Clarifications One, to be clear, I did not make up the story of academics saving their ideas for articles, which Pamela Francis apparently inflated into an attack on her profession. That anecdote originated as an exchange between two academics, one of whom reported it to me. I take it as true. From what I know of academia and the years spent in it, I think that story patently true. Two, I do not hold academia in contempt. That innuendo is another red herring. To the contrary, I value the Academy highly. You, Pamela Francis, are confusing debate with conflict?which surprises me, given your profession and what it values, the free exchange of ideas. You are also indulging in the kind of mischaracterization previously reserved for the ILDS listserv. I am not an academic, but I am on Academia.edu . I don?t have a title and institutional identification, as you do, but my CV and articles can be downloaded at the website. My recent essay is entitled, ?The Ancient Egyptian Context of The Alexandria Quartet,? Mosaic 49.3 (2016): 71-90. So let the debate continue, Bruce On Dec 9, 2016, at 7:43 AM, Pamela Francis > wrote: subject: Bruce Redwine's comments: >That is, he doesn?t want to engage in any kind of > serious discussion?for whatever reason. (So the advice of one > academic?time is better spent writing articles for tenure and promotion.) To Bruce and other members of the listserve: Mr. Redwine's comment is exactly the kind of statement that indicates that this listserve has become a forum for personal grievances rather than any sort of useful discussion. I don't know what you have against people who do academic work, Bruce, but I refuse to even take part in a forum where the very nature of my life's work is somehow considered to be so much blather. No one has ever, to my knowledge (though admittedly, I don't use this forum for the reason stated) said that you don't have any sort of validity in your research just because you are not an academic; however, I do not see the same respect for those of us who do make our living by teaching. You have no idea what teaching in a university in the US is like now--tenure barely even exists, and James Clawson and I both teach in institutions where research and publishing are secondary to the instructional components of our job. It is hard work, and time-consuming work, and to be accused of some sort of snobbery towards non-academics that I know neither James Clawson nor I nor any of the other Board members possess is insulting and uncalled-for. As for out-dated technology; well, yes, listserves are outdated. I subscribed to about five of them about ten years ago. As far as I know, this is the only one that is still extant. If you choose not to use social media, so be it, but I find our page to be lively and informative, and I have come to know a great number of people (most, for your information, NOT academics) from all over the world. We are investigating other forums, but I will say that the listserve has become little more than a place for you to make derogatory comments about other Durrellians and this is the main reason that I, at least, will be more than happy to see this forum go away. I promote Durrell scholarship, but I also promote general discussion on both Durrells, and if you have ever attended an OMG (I think you were in Victoria?), you would know that a number of our participants are not affiliated with universities, but are thoughtful admirers of Larry and his work. Our Society has room for all those who are interested in him, but it does NOT have room for people who are for some reason dismissive of those from one or the other "camp." The fact that I have to refer to two "camps" is a problem, and one that I never dreamed would be an issue in this Society. I realize this is not a well-written reply--I am in the middle of giving a final, which is some of that work I do to get "promoted," which means that in another three years, I'll get another $300 a year added to my salary. Having read some of your missives, I know that you will likely tear apart my writing. But I have read too many of these mean-spirited posts, and I have just had enough. This listserve is not in the spirit of genuine dialogue about a fascinating and complicated writer, and I, for one, do not mourn its passing. Sincerely, Pamela J. Francis, Vice-President, International Lawrence Durrell Society and Editor, The Lawrence Durrell Society Herald. On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 2:00 PM, > wrote: Send ILDS mailing list submissions to ilds at lists.uvic.ca To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca You can reach the person managing the list at ilds-owner at lists.uvic.ca When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of ILDS digest..." Today's Topics: 1. LISTSERV (William Apt) 2. ILDS Listserv (Bruce Redwine) 3. Re: ILDS Listserv (PETER BALDWIN) 4. Durrell in Hebrew (Rony Alfandary) 5. Re: Durrell in Hebrew (James Gifford) 6. Re: Durrell in Hebrew (Rony Alfandary) 7. Re: Durrell in Hebrew (Kennedy Gammage) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 13:33:43 -0600 From: William Apt > To: "ilds at lists.uvic.ca " > Subject: [ilds] LISTSERV Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Dearest all: I use neither Facebook nor Twitter. Does that mean that I will not be able to participate in or keep up with discussions unless I join these outlets? Billy -- WILLIAM APT Attorney at Law 812 San Antonio St, Ste 401 Austin TX 78701 512/708-8300 512/708-8011 FAX -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 15:09:30 -0800 From: Bruce Redwine > To: Sumantra Nag > Cc: Bruce Redwine > Subject: [ilds] ILDS Listserv Message-ID: <3246813F-49D5-4AD2-B80A-8453DFB964AD at gmail.com > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" As a due-paying member of the ILDS, I think we need a clarification on the function of the ILDS listserv. Let me quote James Clawson, the incoming president of the ILDS, as he explains in the current Herald: In truth, we?ve been outgrowing the technology behind the listserv for a few years now, and it has with me become a distraction from the work it was meant to serve. We recommend to users that they move the discussion elsewhere? for example, to Facebook, where Pamela keeps up the public group, or to Twitter, where Charles maintains an active presence with @ DurrellSociety. With 130 members in the first of these and 1,600 followers of the latter, these groups serve far more active participants than the listserv, and they?re a vibrant means to reach outward beyond the invisible walls of what could otherwise become an echo chamber. Now, what is Clawson really saying? The listserv, to which he almost never contributed, has become a ?distraction.? (If I recall correctly, Clawson made only one brief comment re the idea of Durrell?s latent ?homosexuality.?) That is, he doesn?t want to engage in any kind of serious discussion?for whatever reason. (So the advice of one academic?time is better spent writing articles for tenure and promotion.) And what was the listserv ?meant to serve?? What is it now intended to become? Presumably a vehicle for a kind of Durrellian agitprop, which can be more effectively propagated on social networks such as Twitter and Facebook. And why did the listserv become an ?echo chamber?? Because, with one notable exception, academics never contribute to the discussions. Yes, Clawson's reasoning is circular. I don?t use social networks and never will. These are not forums for ?discussion,? as Clawson claims. They?re places for dropping one-liners and postcard impressions. I?m very suspicious of those who use these outlets. I think that they pander to the craving for fame and recognition and that they promote lazy thinking, the kind president-elect Donald Trump indulges in. Bruce -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 05:47:40 +0000 From: PETER BALDWIN > To: "ilds at lists.uvic.ca " > Subject: Re: [ilds] ILDS Listserv Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" A number of comments : 1. The ILDS needs to keep up with the times and consider how best to use social media 2. All such media are open to abuse and that, regrettably, has to be factored into our use of such media 3. If James' comments reflect a change of ILDS policy determined by the ILDS committee, I would rather it had be sent out first via The Herald for consultation. 4. Against my better judgement, I subscribe to both Facebook and Twitter. Contrary to my expectation when I subscribed to Facebook with a view to keeping in touch with far-fling family, I consider it useless. However, I have found it invaluable for special interest groups where info and photos can be shared - both helpful and enjoyable. I am still finding my feet with Twitter but, again, think it is a good forum for views on shared interest. 5. I personally would keep the list serve since there is no character limit. Hope these comments help Peter Baldwin Sent from my iPhone On 7 Dec 2016, at 23:43, Bruce Redwine >> wrote: As a due-paying member of the ILDS, I think we need a clarification on the function of the ILDS listserv. Let me quote James Clawson, the incoming president of the ILDS, as he explains in the current Herald: In truth, we've been outgrowing the technology behind the listserv for a few years now, and it has with me become a distraction from the work it was meant to serve. We recommend to users that they move the discussion elsewhere- for example, to Facebook, where Pamela keeps up the public group, or to Twitter, where Charles maintains an active presence with @ DurrellSociety. With 130 members in the first of these and 1,600 followers of the latter, these groups serve far more active participants than the listserv, and they're a vibrant means to reach outward beyond the invisible walls of what could otherwise become an echo chamber. Now, what is Clawson really saying? The listserv, to which he almost never contributed, has become a "distraction." (If I recall correctly, Clawson made only one brief comment re the idea of Durrell's latent "homosexuality.") That is, he doesn't want to engage in any kind of serious discussion-for whatever reason. (So the advice of one academic-time is better spent writing articles for tenure and promotion.) And what was the listserv "meant to serve?" What is it now intended to become? Presumably a vehicle for a kind of Durrellian agitprop, which can be more effectively propagated on social networks such as Twitter and Facebook. And why did the listserv become an "echo chamber?" Because, with one notable exception, academics never contribute to the discussions. Yes, Clawson's reasoning is circular. I don't use social networks and never will. These are not forums for "discussion," as Clawson claims. They're places for dropping one-liners and postcard impressions. I'm very suspicious of those who use these outlets. I think that they pander to the craving for fame and recognition and that they promote lazy thinking, the kind president-elect Donald Trump indulges in. Bruce -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bredwine1968 at earthlink.net Sat Dec 10 14:35:12 2016 From: bredwine1968 at earthlink.net (Bruce Redwine) Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2016 14:35:12 -0800 Subject: [ilds] The Function of the ILDS Listserv In-Reply-To: <000601d2532b$b16e2310$144a6930$@earthlink.net> References: <000601d2532b$b16e2310$144a6930$@earthlink.net> Message-ID: Thanks for the information. But I expected to be informed of the outcome of my nomination. A followed up, as you have just provided, would have been appreciated. Similarly, journals normally do this when rejecting MSS. It?s a matter of courtesy. Bruce > On Dec 10, 2016, at 1:23 PM, Anne Zahlan wrote: > > Among the many complaints expressed by Mr. Redwine was the following: I nominated someone for ExCom, but I was never informed of what happened to my nomination, which, as I eventually learned, went nowhere or possibly into the trashcan. > > I am reliably informed by the chair of the nominations committee that Mr. Redwine?s nomination, as all others, was acknowledged with thanks. Of course, the committee appropriately considered all nominations, considered which candidates had more nominations than others, and discussed experience and qualifications of all before making a decision. > > > From: ILDS [mailto:ilds-bounces at lists.uvic.ca] On Behalf Of Bruce Redwine > Sent: Friday, December 9, 2016 8:07 PM > To: Sumantra Nag > Cc: Bruce Redwine > Subject: [ilds] The Function of the ILDS Listserv > > Dear Pamela Francis and G. R. Taneja: > > Thanks for your two responses. > > First, let?s avoid the red herring about the difficulties of pursuing an academic career. Which I do not dispute. Let?s stick to the topic of what has become of the ILDS listserv and all its implications. Perhaps I idealize, but I see it as a forum for discussing issues related to Lawrence Durrell in depth. A place to test ideas and to see what works and what doesn?t. That precedent was set back in 2007 (?), during a moderated (and highly successful) close reading of Justine. The ILDS moderators were James Gifford, Charles Sligh, and Bill Godshalk. They were all excellent, and they were all academics. Gifford and Sligh provided detailed commentary. Godshalk was pithy and humorous. But they all participated?and that's my main point. Do we see such participation today? No (with one or two exceptions). That?s a fact. Am I advocating a return to the culture of 2007? No. My model is Bill Godshalk, who was (now sadly gone) a very busy and productive scholar of great worth. In his unique style, Bill listened, commented, prodded, and kept the discussions going. He was undoubtedly a fine teacher in the Socratic tradition. Does such participation involve a lot of extra work? Although possibly wrong, I don?t think so, unless one is stimulated to greater involvement. I don?t expect the list to ever repeat the success of 2007. Some crude ?simulacrum,? however, can be attempted. Last year a reading of Tunc took place. > > Two, what?s the situation today? Above all, praise goes to James Gifford for his tireless moderation of the list?s remnants. Now, James Clawson mischaracterizes the ILDS listserv as a ?distraction? and an ?echo chamber,? which I take personally offensive, and he uses the Society?s newsletter to publish his views. In doing so, he promulgates official policy. If challenging this characterization is an ad hominem attack, then this forum has indeed ceased to be a place for ?any sort of useful discussion.? I?ve always thought of the Academy as a place for open debate. The fact that both of you disagree with my challenge, strongly suggests to me that you believe the general membership of the ILDS should pay their annual dues, sit quietly, and not complain as policy is determined by a select few. For another opinion, I suggest you read Peter Baldwin?s email of 7 December 2016, item no. 3 in particular. On this point, I completely agree with Peter. > > Three, is the ILDS a democracy or an oligarchy? I think it?s run like the latter. But this is a matter of the bylaws. Perhaps a lawyer can comment. I realize that institutions like corporations are not democracies (so I was informed by an SVP when I worked in one). Does the ILDS fit this pattern? Is the Executive Committee (ExCom) too satisfied with its plenary powers? Hence, no need to consult and no need to justify itself? I nominated someone for ExCom, but I was never informed of what happened to my nomination, which, as I eventually learned, went nowhere or possibly into the trashcan. I would like to see, in the jargon of the day, more ?transparency.? For example, are the minutes of ExCom meetings taken? If so, why aren?t they circulated via the list and why aren?t comments solicited? Generally, I find ExCom unresponsive, as illustrated by two previously emails by others on this topic, which, so far, have gone unanswered. It seems that the only way to get a response is to be blunt, of which I am guilty. > > Four, for all the reason stated above and previously, I do not agree that the ILDS listserv is antiquated and useless. As to the value of Twitter and Facebook as vehicles for ?discussing? Lawrence Durrell, I?ve already stated my views in a previous email. They have not changed. In brief, I see those outlets as a diminution of Durrellian studies. I?ll not participate in them, and I see no point in pandering to the whims of current social media. Yes, I?m an old fogey. > > > Clarifications > > > One, to be clear, I did not make up the story of academics saving their ideas for articles, which Pamela Francis apparently inflated into an attack on her profession. That anecdote originated as an exchange between two academics, one of whom reported it to me. I take it as true. From what I know of academia and the years spent in it, I think that story patently true. > > Two, I do not hold academia in contempt. That innuendo is another red herring. To the contrary, I value the Academy highly. You, Pamela Francis, are confusing debate with conflict?which surprises me, given your profession and what it values, the free exchange of ideas. You are also indulging in the kind of mischaracterization previously reserved for the ILDS listserv. I am not an academic, but I am on Academia.edu . I don?t have a title and institutional identification, as you do, but my CV and articles can be downloaded at the website. My recent essay is entitled, ?The Ancient Egyptian Context of The Alexandria Quartet,? Mosaic 49.3 (2016): 71-90. > > So let the debate continue, > > Bruce > > > > > >> On Dec 9, 2016, at 7:43 AM, Pamela Francis > wrote: >> >> subject: Bruce Redwine's comments: >> >> >That is, he doesn?t want to engage in any kind of >> > serious discussion?for whatever reason. (So the advice of one >> > academic?time is better spent writing articles for tenure and promotion.) >> >> To Bruce and other members of the listserve: >> >> Mr. Redwine's comment is exactly the kind of statement that indicates that this listserve has become a forum for personal grievances rather than any sort of useful discussion. I don't know what you have against people who do academic work, Bruce, but I refuse to even take part in a forum where the very nature of my life's work is somehow considered to be so much blather. No one has ever, to my knowledge (though admittedly, I don't use this forum for the reason stated) said that you don't have any sort of validity in your research just because you are not an academic; however, I do not see the same respect for those of us who do make our living by teaching. You have no idea what teaching in a university in the US is like now--tenure barely even exists, and James Clawson and I both teach in institutions where research and publishing are secondary to the instructional components of our job. It is hard work, and time-consuming work, and to be accused of some sort of snobbery towards non-academics that I know neither James Clawson nor I nor any of the other Board members possess is insulting and uncalled-for. >> >> As for out-dated technology; well, yes, listserves are outdated. I subscribed to about five of them about ten years ago. As far as I know, this is the only one that is still extant. If you choose not to use social media, so be it, but I find our page to be lively and informative, and I have come to know a great number of people (most, for your information, NOT academics) from all over the world. We are investigating other forums, but I will say that the listserve has become little more than a place for you to make derogatory comments about other Durrellians and this is the main reason that I, at least, will be more than happy to see this forum go away. >> >> I promote Durrell scholarship, but I also promote general discussion on both Durrells, and if you have ever attended an OMG (I think you were in Victoria?), you would know that a number of our participants are not affiliated with universities, but are thoughtful admirers of Larry and his work. Our Society has room for all those who are interested in him, but it does NOT have room for people who are for some reason dismissive of those from one or the other "camp." The fact that I have to refer to two "camps" is a problem, and one that I never dreamed would be an issue in this Society. >> >> I realize this is not a well-written reply--I am in the middle of giving a final, which is some of that work I do to get "promoted," which means that in another three years, I'll get another $300 a year added to my salary. Having read some of your missives, I know that you will likely tear apart my writing. But I have read too many of these mean-spirited posts, and I have just had enough. This listserve is not in the spirit of genuine dialogue about a fascinating and complicated writer, and I, for one, do not mourn its passing. >> >> Sincerely, >> Pamela J. Francis, Vice-President, International Lawrence Durrell Society and Editor, The Lawrence Durrell Society Herald. >> >> On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 2:00 PM, > wrote: >>> Send ILDS mailing list submissions to >>> ilds at lists.uvic.ca >>> >>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >>> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds >>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >>> ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca >>> >>> You can reach the person managing the list at >>> ilds-owner at lists.uvic.ca >>> >>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >>> than "Re: Contents of ILDS digest..." >>> >>> >>> Today's Topics: >>> >>> 1. LISTSERV (William Apt) >>> 2. ILDS Listserv (Bruce Redwine) >>> 3. Re: ILDS Listserv (PETER BALDWIN) >>> 4. Durrell in Hebrew (Rony Alfandary) >>> 5. Re: Durrell in Hebrew (James Gifford) >>> 6. Re: Durrell in Hebrew (Rony Alfandary) >>> 7. Re: Durrell in Hebrew (Kennedy Gammage) >>> >>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> >>> Message: 1 >>> Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 13:33:43 -0600 >>> From: William Apt > >>> To: "ilds at lists.uvic.ca " > >>> Subject: [ilds] LISTSERV >>> Message-ID: >>> > >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >>> >>> Dearest all: >>> >>> I use neither Facebook nor Twitter. Does that mean that I will not be able >>> to participate in or keep up >>> with discussions unless I join these outlets? >>> >>> Billy >>> -- >>> WILLIAM APT >>> Attorney at Law >>> 812 San Antonio St, Ste 401 >>> Austin TX 78701 >>> 512/708-8300 >>> 512/708-8011 FAX >>> -------------- next part -------------- >>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >>> URL: > >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> Message: 2 >>> Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 15:09:30 -0800 >>> From: Bruce Redwine > >>> To: Sumantra Nag > >>> Cc: Bruce Redwine > >>> Subject: [ilds] ILDS Listserv >>> Message-ID: <3246813F-49D5-4AD2-B80A-8453DFB964AD at gmail.com > >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >>> >>> As a due-paying member of the ILDS, I think we need a clarification on the function of the ILDS listserv. Let me quote James Clawson, the incoming president of the ILDS, as he explains in the current Herald: >>> In truth, we?ve been outgrowing the technology behind the listserv for a few years now, and it has with me become a distraction from the work it was meant to serve. We recommend to users that they move the discussion elsewhere? for example, to Facebook, where Pamela keeps up the public group, or to Twitter, where Charles maintains an active presence with @ DurrellSociety. With 130 members in the first of these and 1,600 followers of the latter, these groups serve far more active participants than the listserv, and they?re a vibrant means to reach outward beyond the invisible walls of what could otherwise become an echo chamber. >>> >>> Now, what is Clawson really saying? The listserv, to which he almost never contributed, has become a ?distraction.? (If I recall correctly, Clawson made only one brief comment re the idea of Durrell?s latent ?homosexuality.?) That is, he doesn?t want to engage in any kind of serious discussion?for whatever reason. (So the advice of one academic?time is better spent writing articles for tenure and promotion.) And what was the listserv ?meant to serve?? What is it now intended to become? Presumably a vehicle for a kind of Durrellian agitprop, which can be more effectively propagated on social networks such as Twitter and Facebook. And why did the listserv become an ?echo chamber?? Because, with one notable exception, academics never contribute to the discussions. Yes, Clawson's reasoning is circular. >>> >>> I don?t use social networks and never will. These are not forums for ?discussion,? as Clawson claims. They?re places for dropping one-liners and postcard impressions. I?m very suspicious of those who use these outlets. I think that they pander to the craving for fame and recognition and that they promote lazy thinking, the kind president-elect Donald Trump indulges in. >>> >>> Bruce >>> -------------- next part -------------- >>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... >>> URL: > >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> Message: 3 >>> Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 05:47:40 +0000 >>> From: PETER BALDWIN > >>> To: "ilds at lists.uvic.ca " > >>> Subject: Re: [ilds] ILDS Listserv >>> Message-ID: >>> > >>> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >>> >>> A number of comments : >>> >>> 1. The ILDS needs to keep up with the times and consider how best to use social media >>> >>> 2. All such media are open to abuse and that, regrettably, has to be factored into our use of such media >>> >>> 3. If James' comments reflect a change of ILDS policy determined by the ILDS committee, I would rather it had be sent out first via The Herald for consultation. >>> >>> 4. Against my better judgement, I subscribe to both Facebook and Twitter. Contrary to my expectation when I subscribed to Facebook with a view to keeping in touch with far-fling family, I consider it useless. However, I have found it invaluable for special interest groups where info and photos can be shared - both helpful and enjoyable. I am still finding my feet with Twitter but, again, think it is a good forum for views on shared interest. >>> >>> 5. I personally would keep the list serve since there is no character limit. >>> >>> Hope these comments help >>> >>> Peter Baldwin >>> >>> >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>> On 7 Dec 2016, at 23:43, Bruce Redwine >> wrote: >>> >>> As a due-paying member of the ILDS, I think we need a clarification on the function of the ILDS listserv. Let me quote James Clawson, the incoming president of the ILDS, as he explains in the current Herald: >>> >>> In truth, we've been outgrowing the technology behind the listserv for a few years now, and it has with me become a distraction from the work it was meant to serve. We recommend to users that they move the discussion elsewhere- for example, to Facebook, where Pamela keeps up the public group, or to Twitter, where Charles maintains an active presence with @ DurrellSociety. With 130 members in the first of these and 1,600 followers of the latter, these groups serve far more active participants than the listserv, and they're a vibrant means to reach outward beyond the invisible walls of what could otherwise become an echo chamber. >>> >>> Now, what is Clawson really saying? The listserv, to which he almost never contributed, has become a "distraction." (If I recall correctly, Clawson made only one brief comment re the idea of Durrell's latent "homosexuality.") That is, he doesn't want to engage in any kind of serious discussion-for whatever reason. (So the advice of one academic-time is better spent writing articles for tenure and promotion.) And what was the listserv "meant to serve?" What is it now intended to become? Presumably a vehicle for a kind of Durrellian agitprop, which can be more effectively propagated on social networks such as Twitter and Facebook. And why did the listserv become an "echo chamber?" Because, with one notable exception, academics never contribute to the discussions. Yes, Clawson's reasoning is circular. >>> >>> I don't use social networks and never will. These are not forums for "discussion," as Clawson claims. They're places for dropping one-liners and postcard impressions. I'm very suspicious of those who use these outlets. I think that they pander to the craving for fame and recognition and that they promote lazy thinking, the kind president-elect Donald Trump indulges in. >>> >>> Bruce > > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From rjdurbin at gcsolutions.com Sun Dec 11 22:08:50 2016 From: rjdurbin at gcsolutions.com (Ronald Durbin) Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2016 00:08:50 -0600 Subject: [ilds] A layman's view Message-ID: <005d01d2543e$38f98d70$aaeca850$@gcsolutions.com> Having been a lurker and non-contributor off and on over the years on the list and a current paying member, I am re-reading Justine for the umptieth time, and still wondering why. My two shelves of Durrrell are I n storage for 2 years, but I will continue to read them when I get them back. Sorry to see such discord among Durellians. Love or hate his writing we dumb non-academics keep reading and learning from academics. -----Original Message----- From: ILDS [mailto:ilds-bounces at lists.uvic.ca] On Behalf Of ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca Sent: Sunday, December 11, 2016 2:01 PM To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca Subject: ILDS Digest, Vol 116, Issue 5 Send ILDS mailing list submissions to ilds at lists.uvic.ca To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca You can reach the person managing the list at ilds-owner at lists.uvic.ca When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of ILDS digest..." Today's Topics: 1. Re: The Function of the ILDS Listserv (Anne Zahlan) 2. Re: The Function of the ILDS Listserv (Bruce Redwine) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2016 16:23:46 -0500 From: "Anne Zahlan" To: Subject: Re: [ilds] The Function of the ILDS Listserv Message-ID: <000601d2532b$b16e2310$144a6930$@earthlink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Among the many complaints expressed by Mr. Redwine was the following: I nominated someone for ExCom, but I was never informed of what happened to my nomination, which, as I eventually learned, went nowhere or possibly into the trashcan. I am reliably informed by the chair of the nominations committee that Mr. Redwine?s nomination, as all others, was acknowledged with thanks. Of course, the committee appropriately considered all nominations, considered which candidates had more nominations than others, and discussed experience and qualifications of all before making a decision. From: ILDS [mailto:ilds-bounces at lists.uvic.ca] On Behalf Of Bruce Redwine Sent: Friday, December 9, 2016 8:07 PM To: Sumantra Nag Cc: Bruce Redwine Subject: [ilds] The Function of the ILDS Listserv Dear Pamela Francis and G. R. Taneja: Thanks for your two responses. First, let?s avoid the red herring about the difficulties of pursuing an academic career. Which I do not dispute. Let?s stick to the topic of what has become of the ILDS listserv and all its implications. Perhaps I idealize, but I see it as a forum for discussing issues related to Lawrence Durrell in depth. A place to test ideas and to see what works and what doesn?t. That precedent was set back in 2007 (?), during a moderated (and highly successful) close reading of Justine. The ILDS moderators were James Gifford, Charles Sligh, and Bill Godshalk. They were all excellent, and they were all academics. Gifford and Sligh provided detailed commentary. Godshalk was pithy and humorous. But they all participated?and that's my main point. Do we see such participation today? No (with one or two exceptions). That?s a fact. Am I advocating a return to the culture of 2007? No. My model is Bill Godshalk, who was (now sadly gone) a very busy and productive scholar of grea! t worth. In his unique style, Bill listened, commented, prodded, and kept the discussions going. He was undoubtedly a fine teacher in the Socratic tradition. Does such participation involve a lot of extra work? Although possibly wrong, I don?t think so, unless one is stimulated to greater involvement. I don?t expect the list to ever repeat the success of 2007. Some crude ?simulacrum,? however, can be attempted. Last year a reading of Tunc took place. Two, what?s the situation today? Above all, praise goes to James Gifford for his tireless moderation of the list?s remnants. Now, James Clawson mischaracterizes the ILDS listserv as a ?distraction? and an ?echo chamber,? which I take personally offensive, and he uses the Society?s newsletter to publish his views. In doing so, he promulgates official policy. If challenging this characterization is an ad hominem attack, then this forum has indeed ceased to be a place for ?any sort of useful discussion.? I?ve always thought of the Academy as a place for open debate. The fact that both of you disagree with my challenge, strongly suggests to me that you believe the general membership of the ILDS should pay their annual dues, sit quietly, and not complain as policy is determined by a select few. For another opinion, I suggest you read Peter Baldwin?s email of 7 December 2016, item no. 3 in particular. On this point, I completely agree with Peter. Three, is the ILDS a democracy or an oligarchy? I think it?s run like the latter. But this is a matter of the bylaws. Perhaps a lawyer can comment. I realize that institutions like corporations are not democracies (so I was informed by an SVP when I worked in one). Does the ILDS fit this pattern? Is the Executive Committee (ExCom) too satisfied with its plenary powers? Hence, no need to consult and no need to justify itself? I nominated someone for ExCom, but I was never informed of what happened to my nomination, which, as I eventually learned, went nowhere or possibly into the trashcan. I would like to see, in the jargon of the day, more ?transparency.? For example, are the minutes of ExCom meetings taken? If so, why aren?t they circulated via the list and why aren?t comments solicited? Generally, I find ExCom unresponsive, as illustrated by two previously emails by others on this topic, which, so far, have gone unanswered. It seems that the only way to get a ! response is to be blunt, of which I am guilty. Four, for all the reason stated above and previously, I do not agree that the ILDS listserv is antiquated and useless. As to the value of Twitter and Facebook as vehicles for ?discussing? Lawrence Durrell, I?ve already stated my views in a previous email. They have not changed. In brief, I see those outlets as a diminution of Durrellian studies. I?ll not participate in them, and I see no point in pandering to the whims of current social media. Yes, I?m an old fogey. Clarifications One, to be clear, I did not make up the story of academics saving their ideas for articles, which Pamela Francis apparently inflated into an attack on her profession. That anecdote originated as an exchange between two academics, one of whom reported it to me. I take it as true. From what I know of academia and the years spent in it, I think that story patently true. Two, I do not hold academia in contempt. That innuendo is another red herring. To the contrary, I value the Academy highly. You, Pamela Francis, are confusing debate with conflict?which surprises me, given your profession and what it values, the free exchange of ideas. You are also indulging in the kind of mischaracterization previously reserved for the ILDS listserv. I am not an academic, but I am on Academia.edu . I don?t have a title and institutional identification, as you do, but my CV and articles can be downloaded at the website. My recent essay is entitled, ?The Ancient Egyptian Context of The Alexandria Quartet,? Mosaic 49.3 (2016): 71-90. So let the debate continue, Bruce On Dec 9, 2016, at 7:43 AM, Pamela Francis > wrote: subject: Bruce Redwine's comments: >That is, he doesn?t want to engage in any kind of serious >discussion?for whatever reason. (So the advice of one academic?time >is better spent writing articles for tenure and promotion.) To Bruce and other members of the listserve: Mr. Redwine's comment is exactly the kind of statement that indicates that this listserve has become a forum for personal grievances rather than any sort of useful discussion. I don't know what you have against people who do academic work, Bruce, but I refuse to even take part in a forum where the very nature of my life's work is somehow considered to be so much blather. No one has ever, to my knowledge (though admittedly, I don't use this forum for the reason stated) said that you don't have any sort of validity in your research just because you are not an academic; however, I do not see the same respect for those of us who do make our living by teaching. You have no idea what teaching in a university in the US is like now--tenure barely even exists, and James Clawson and I both teach in institutions where research and publishing are secondary to the instructional components of our job. It is hard work, and time-consuming work, and to be accused of some sort of snobbery tow! ards non-academics that I know neither James Clawson nor I nor any of the other Board members possess is insulting and uncalled-for. As for out-dated technology; well, yes, listserves are outdated. I subscribed to about five of them about ten years ago. As far as I know, this is the only one that is still extant. If you choose not to use social media, so be it, but I find our page to be lively and informative, and I have come to know a great number of people (most, for your information, NOT academics) from all over the world. We are investigating other forums, but I will say that the listserve has become little more than a place for you to make derogatory comments about other Durrellians and this is the main reason that I, at least, will be more than happy to see this forum go away. I promote Durrell scholarship, but I also promote general discussion on both Durrells, and if you have ever attended an OMG (I think you were in Victoria?), you would know that a number of our participants are not affiliated with universities, but are thoughtful admirers of Larry and his work. Our Society has room for all those who are interested in him, but it does NOT have room for people who are for some reason dismissive of those from one or the other "camp." The fact that I have to refer to two "camps" is a problem, and one that I never dreamed would be an issue in this Society. I realize this is not a well-written reply--I am in the middle of giving a final, which is some of that work I do to get "promoted," which means that in another three years, I'll get another $300 a year added to my salary. Having read some of your missives, I know that you will likely tear apart my writing. But I have read too many of these mean-spirited posts, and I have just had enough. This listserve is not in the spirit of genuine dialogue about a fascinating and complicated writer, and I, for one, do not mourn its passing. Sincerely, Pamela J. Francis, Vice-President, International Lawrence Durrell Society and Editor, The Lawrence Durrell Society Herald. On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 2:00 PM, > wrote: Send ILDS mailing list submissions to ilds at lists.uvic.ca To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca You can reach the person managing the list at ilds-owner at lists.uvic.ca When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of ILDS digest..." Today's Topics: 1. LISTSERV (William Apt) 2. ILDS Listserv (Bruce Redwine) 3. Re: ILDS Listserv (PETER BALDWIN) 4. Durrell in Hebrew (Rony Alfandary) 5. Re: Durrell in Hebrew (James Gifford) 6. Re: Durrell in Hebrew (Rony Alfandary) 7. Re: Durrell in Hebrew (Kennedy Gammage) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 13:33:43 -0600 From: William Apt > To: "ilds at lists.uvic.ca " > Subject: [ilds] LISTSERV Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Dearest all: I use neither Facebook nor Twitter. Does that mean that I will not be able to participate in or keep up with discussions unless I join these outlets? Billy -- WILLIAM APT Attorney at Law 812 San Antonio St, Ste 401 Austin TX 78701 512/708-8300 512/708-8011 FAX -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 15:09:30 -0800 From: Bruce Redwine > To: Sumantra Nag > Cc: Bruce Redwine > Subject: [ilds] ILDS Listserv Message-ID: <3246813F-49D5-4AD2-B80A-8453DFB964AD at gmail.com > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" As a due-paying member of the ILDS, I think we need a clarification on the function of the ILDS listserv. Let me quote James Clawson, the incoming president of the ILDS, as he explains in the current Herald: In truth, we?ve been outgrowing the technology behind the listserv for a few years now, and it has with me become a distraction from the work it was meant to serve. We recommend to users that they move the discussion elsewhere? for example, to Facebook, where Pamela keeps up the public group, or to Twitter, where Charles maintains an active presence with @ DurrellSociety. With 130 members in the first of these and 1,600 followers of the latter, these groups serve far more active participants than the listserv, and they?re a vibrant means to reach outward beyond the invisible walls of what could otherwise become an echo chamber. Now, what is Clawson really saying? The listserv, to which he almost never contributed, has become a ?distraction.? (If I recall correctly, Clawson made only one brief comment re the idea of Durrell?s latent ?homosexuality.?) That is, he doesn?t want to engage in any kind of serious discussion?for whatever reason. (So the advice of one academic?time is better spent writing articles for tenure and promotion.) And what was the listserv ?meant to serve?? What is it now intended to become? Presumably a vehicle for a kind of Durrellian agitprop, which can be more effectively propagated on social networks such as Twitter and Facebook. And why did the listserv become an ?echo chamber?? Because, with one notable exception, academics never contribute to the discussions. Yes, Clawson's reasoning is circular. I don?t use social networks and never will. These are not forums for ?discussion,? as Clawson claims. They?re places for dropping one-liners and postcard impressions. I?m very suspicious of those who use these outlets. I think that they pander to the craving for fame and recognition and that they promote lazy thinking, the kind president-elect Donald Trump indulges in. Bruce -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Message: 3 Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 05:47:40 +0000 From: PETER BALDWIN > To: "ilds at lists.uvic.ca " > Subject: Re: [ilds] ILDS Listserv Message-ID: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" A number of comments : 1. The ILDS needs to keep up with the times and consider how best to use social media 2. All such media are open to abuse and that, regrettably, has to be factored into our use of such media 3. If James' comments reflect a change of ILDS policy determined by the ILDS committee, I would rather it had be sent out first via The Herald for consultation. 4. Against my better judgement, I subscribe to both Facebook and Twitter. Contrary to my expectation when I subscribed to Facebook with a view to keeping in touch with far-fling family, I consider it useless. However, I have found it invaluable for special interest groups where info and photos can be shared - both helpful and enjoyable. I am still finding my feet with Twitter but, again, think it is a good forum for views on shared interest. 5. I personally would keep the list serve since there is no character limit. Hope these comments help Peter Baldwin Sent from my iPhone On 7 Dec 2016, at 23:43, Bruce Redwine >> wrote: As a due-paying member of the ILDS, I think we need a clarification on the function of the ILDS listserv. Let me quote James Clawson, the incoming president of the ILDS, as he explains in the current Herald: In truth, we've been outgrowing the technology behind the listserv for a few years now, and it has with me become a distraction from the work it was meant to serve. We recommend to users that they move the discussion elsewhere- for example, to Facebook, where Pamela keeps up the public group, or to Twitter, where Charles maintains an active presence with @ DurrellSociety. With 130 members in the first of these and 1,600 followers of the latter, these groups serve far more active participants than the listserv, and they're a vibrant means to reach outward beyond the invisible walls of what could otherwise become an echo chamber. Now, what is Clawson really saying? The listserv, to which he almost never contributed, has become a "distraction." (If I recall correctly, Clawson made only one brief comment re the idea of Durrell's latent "homosexuality.") That is, he doesn't want to engage in any kind of serious discussion-for whatever reason. (So the advice of one academic-time is better spent writing articles for tenure and promotion.) And what was the listserv "meant to serve?" What is it now intended to become? Presumably a vehicle for a kind of Durrellian agitprop, which can be more effectively propagated on social networks such as Twitter and Facebook. And why did the listserv become an "echo chamber?" Because, with one notable exception, academics never contribute to the discussions. Yes, Clawson's reasoning is circular. I don't use social networks and never will. These are not forums for "discussion," as Clawson claims. They're places for dropping one-liners and postcard impressions. I'm very suspicious of those who use these outlets. I think that they pander to the craving for fame and recognition and that they promote lazy thinking, the kind president-elect Donald Trump indulges in. Bruce -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Message: 2 Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2016 14:35:12 -0800 From: Bruce Redwine To: Sumantra Nag Cc: Bruce Redwine Subject: Re: [ilds] The Function of the ILDS Listserv Message-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Thanks for the information. But I expected to be informed of the outcome of my nomination. A followed up, as you have just provided, would have been appreciated. Similarly, journals normally do this when rejecting MSS. It?s a matter of courtesy. Bruce > On Dec 10, 2016, at 1:23 PM, Anne Zahlan wrote: > > Among the many complaints expressed by Mr. Redwine was the following: I nominated someone for ExCom, but I was never informed of what happened to my nomination, which, as I eventually learned, went nowhere or possibly into the trashcan. > > I am reliably informed by the chair of the nominations committee that Mr. Redwine?s nomination, as all others, was acknowledged with thanks. Of course, the committee appropriately considered all nominations, considered which candidates had more nominations than others, and discussed experience and qualifications of all before making a decision. > > > From: ILDS [mailto:ilds-bounces at lists.uvic.ca] On Behalf Of Bruce > Redwine > Sent: Friday, December 9, 2016 8:07 PM > To: Sumantra Nag > Cc: Bruce Redwine > Subject: [ilds] The Function of the ILDS Listserv > > Dear Pamela Francis and G. R. Taneja: > > Thanks for your two responses. > > First, let?s avoid the red herring about the difficulties of pursuing an academic career. Which I do not dispute. Let?s stick to the topic of what has become of the ILDS listserv and all its implications. Perhaps I idealize, but I see it as a forum for discussing issues related to Lawrence Durrell in depth. A place to test ideas and to see what works and what doesn?t. That precedent was set back in 2007 (?), during a moderated (and highly successful) close reading of Justine. The ILDS moderators were James Gifford, Charles Sligh, and Bill Godshalk. They were all excellent, and they were all academics. Gifford and Sligh provided detailed commentary. Godshalk was pithy and humorous. But they all participated?and that's my main point. Do we see such participation today? No (with one or two exceptions). That?s a fact. Am I advocating a return to the culture of 2007? No. My model is Bill Godshalk, who was (now sadly gone) a very busy and productive scholar of gr! eat worth. In his unique style, Bill listened, commented, prodded, and kept the discussions going. He was undoubtedly a fine teacher in the Socratic tradition. Does such participation involve a lot of extra work? Although possibly wrong, I don?t think so, unless one is stimulated to greater involvement. I don?t expect the list to ever repeat the success of 2007. Some crude ?simulacrum,? however, can be attempted. Last year a reading of Tunc took place. > > Two, what?s the situation today? Above all, praise goes to James Gifford for his tireless moderation of the list?s remnants. Now, James Clawson mischaracterizes the ILDS listserv as a ?distraction? and an ?echo chamber,? which I take personally offensive, and he uses the Society?s newsletter to publish his views. In doing so, he promulgates official policy. If challenging this characterization is an ad hominem attack, then this forum has indeed ceased to be a place for ?any sort of useful discussion.? I?ve always thought of the Academy as a place for open debate. The fact that both of you disagree with my challenge, strongly suggests to me that you believe the general membership of the ILDS should pay their annual dues, sit quietly, and not complain as policy is determined by a select few. For another opinion, I suggest you read Peter Baldwin?s email of 7 December 2016, item no. 3 in particular. On this point, I completely agree with Peter. > > Three, is the ILDS a democracy or an oligarchy? I think it?s run like the latter. But this is a matter of the bylaws. Perhaps a lawyer can comment. I realize that institutions like corporations are not democracies (so I was informed by an SVP when I worked in one). Does the ILDS fit this pattern? Is the Executive Committee (ExCom) too satisfied with its plenary powers? Hence, no need to consult and no need to justify itself? I nominated someone for ExCom, but I was never informed of what happened to my nomination, which, as I eventually learned, went nowhere or possibly into the trashcan. I would like to see, in the jargon of the day, more ?transparency.? For example, are the minutes of ExCom meetings taken? If so, why aren?t they circulated via the list and why aren?t comments solicited? Generally, I find ExCom unresponsive, as illustrated by two previously emails by others on this topic, which, so far, have gone unanswered. It seems that the only way to get ! a response is to be blunt, of which I am guilty. > > Four, for all the reason stated above and previously, I do not agree that the ILDS listserv is antiquated and useless. As to the value of Twitter and Facebook as vehicles for ?discussing? Lawrence Durrell, I?ve already stated my views in a previous email. They have not changed. In brief, I see those outlets as a diminution of Durrellian studies. I?ll not participate in them, and I see no point in pandering to the whims of current social media. Yes, I?m an old fogey. > > > Clarifications > > > One, to be clear, I did not make up the story of academics saving their ideas for articles, which Pamela Francis apparently inflated into an attack on her profession. That anecdote originated as an exchange between two academics, one of whom reported it to me. I take it as true. From what I know of academia and the years spent in it, I think that story patently true. > > Two, I do not hold academia in contempt. That innuendo is another red herring. To the contrary, I value the Academy highly. You, Pamela Francis, are confusing debate with conflict?which surprises me, given your profession and what it values, the free exchange of ideas. You are also indulging in the kind of mischaracterization previously reserved for the ILDS listserv. I am not an academic, but I am on Academia.edu . I don?t have a title and institutional identification, as you do, but my CV and articles can be downloaded at the website. My recent essay is entitled, ?The Ancient Egyptian Context of The Alexandria Quartet,? Mosaic 49.3 (2016): 71-90. > > So let the debate continue, > > Bruce > > > > > >> On Dec 9, 2016, at 7:43 AM, Pamela Francis > wrote: >> >> subject: Bruce Redwine's comments: >> >> >That is, he doesn?t want to engage in any kind of serious >> >discussion?for whatever reason. (So the advice of one >> >academic?time is better spent writing articles for tenure and >> >promotion.) >> >> To Bruce and other members of the listserve: >> >> Mr. Redwine's comment is exactly the kind of statement that indicates that this listserve has become a forum for personal grievances rather than any sort of useful discussion. I don't know what you have against people who do academic work, Bruce, but I refuse to even take part in a forum where the very nature of my life's work is somehow considered to be so much blather. No one has ever, to my knowledge (though admittedly, I don't use this forum for the reason stated) said that you don't have any sort of validity in your research just because you are not an academic; however, I do not see the same respect for those of us who do make our living by teaching. You have no idea what teaching in a university in the US is like now--tenure barely even exists, and James Clawson and I both teach in institutions where research and publishing are secondary to the instructional components of our job. It is hard work, and time-consuming work, and to be accused of some sort of snobbery ! towards non-academics that I know neither James Clawson nor I nor any of the other Board members possess is insulting and uncalled-for. >> >> As for out-dated technology; well, yes, listserves are outdated. I subscribed to about five of them about ten years ago. As far as I know, this is the only one that is still extant. If you choose not to use social media, so be it, but I find our page to be lively and informative, and I have come to know a great number of people (most, for your information, NOT academics) from all over the world. We are investigating other forums, but I will say that the listserve has become little more than a place for you to make derogatory comments about other Durrellians and this is the main reason that I, at least, will be more than happy to see this forum go away. >> >> I promote Durrell scholarship, but I also promote general discussion on both Durrells, and if you have ever attended an OMG (I think you were in Victoria?), you would know that a number of our participants are not affiliated with universities, but are thoughtful admirers of Larry and his work. Our Society has room for all those who are interested in him, but it does NOT have room for people who are for some reason dismissive of those from one or the other "camp." The fact that I have to refer to two "camps" is a problem, and one that I never dreamed would be an issue in this Society. >> >> I realize this is not a well-written reply--I am in the middle of giving a final, which is some of that work I do to get "promoted," which means that in another three years, I'll get another $300 a year added to my salary. Having read some of your missives, I know that you will likely tear apart my writing. But I have read too many of these mean-spirited posts, and I have just had enough. This listserve is not in the spirit of genuine dialogue about a fascinating and complicated writer, and I, for one, do not mourn its passing. >> >> Sincerely, >> Pamela J. Francis, Vice-President, International Lawrence Durrell Society and Editor, The Lawrence Durrell Society Herald. >> >> On Thu, Dec 8, 2016 at 2:00 PM, > wrote: >>> Send ILDS mailing list submissions to >>> ilds at lists.uvic.ca >>> >>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit >>> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds >>> >>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to >>> ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca >>> >>> >>> You can reach the person managing the list at >>> ilds-owner at lists.uvic.ca >>> >>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific >>> than "Re: Contents of ILDS digest..." >>> >>> >>> Today's Topics: >>> >>> 1. LISTSERV (William Apt) >>> 2. ILDS Listserv (Bruce Redwine) >>> 3. Re: ILDS Listserv (PETER BALDWIN) >>> 4. Durrell in Hebrew (Rony Alfandary) >>> 5. Re: Durrell in Hebrew (James Gifford) >>> 6. Re: Durrell in Hebrew (Rony Alfandary) >>> 7. Re: Durrell in Hebrew (Kennedy Gammage) >>> >>> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> -- >>> >>> Message: 1 >>> Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 13:33:43 -0600 >>> From: William Apt > >>> To: "ilds at lists.uvic.ca " >>> > >>> Subject: [ilds] LISTSERV >>> Message-ID: >>> >>> >> > >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >>> >>> Dearest all: >>> >>> I use neither Facebook nor Twitter. Does that mean that I will not >>> be able to participate in or keep up with discussions unless I join >>> these outlets? >>> >>> Billy >>> -- >>> WILLIAM APT >>> Attorney at Law >>> 812 San Antonio St, Ste 401 >>> Austin TX 78701 >>> 512/708-8300 >>> 512/708-8011 FAX >>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was >>> scrubbed... >>> URL: >>> >> ttachment-0001.html >>> >> ttachment-0001.html>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> Message: 2 >>> Date: Wed, 7 Dec 2016 15:09:30 -0800 >>> From: Bruce Redwine >> > >>> To: Sumantra Nag > >>> Cc: Bruce Redwine >> > >>> Subject: [ilds] ILDS Listserv >>> Message-ID: <3246813F-49D5-4AD2-B80A-8453DFB964AD at gmail.com >>> > >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" >>> >>> As a due-paying member of the ILDS, I think we need a clarification on the function of the ILDS listserv. Let me quote James Clawson, the incoming president of the ILDS, as he explains in the current Herald: >>> In truth, we?ve been outgrowing the technology behind the listserv for a few years now, and it has with me become a distraction from the work it was meant to serve. We recommend to users that they move the discussion elsewhere? for example, to Facebook, where Pamela keeps up the public group, or to Twitter, where Charles maintains an active presence with @ DurrellSociety. With 130 members in the first of these and 1,600 followers of the latter, these groups serve far more active participants than the listserv, and they?re a vibrant means to reach outward beyond the invisible walls of what could otherwise become an echo chamber. >>> >>> Now, what is Clawson really saying? The listserv, to which he almost never contributed, has become a ?distraction.? (If I recall correctly, Clawson made only one brief comment re the idea of Durrell?s latent ?homosexuality.?) That is, he doesn?t want to engage in any kind of serious discussion?for whatever reason. (So the advice of one academic?time is better spent writing articles for tenure and promotion.) And what was the listserv ?meant to serve?? What is it now intended to become? Presumably a vehicle for a kind of Durrellian agitprop, which can be more effectively propagated on social networks such as Twitter and Facebook. And why did the listserv become an ?echo chamber?? Because, with one notable exception, academics never contribute to the discussions. Yes, Clawson's reasoning is circular. >>> >>> I don?t use social networks and never will. These are not forums for ?discussion,? as Clawson claims. They?re places for dropping one-liners and postcard impressions. I?m very suspicious of those who use these outlets. I think that they pander to the craving for fame and recognition and that they promote lazy thinking, the kind president-elect Donald Trump indulges in. >>> >>> Bruce >>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was >>> scrubbed... >>> URL: >>> >> ttachment-0001.html >>> >> ttachment-0001.html>> >>> >>> ------------------------------ >>> >>> Message: 3 >>> Date: Thu, 8 Dec 2016 05:47:40 +0000 >>> From: PETER BALDWIN >> > >>> To: "ilds at lists.uvic.ca " >>> > >>> Subject: Re: [ilds] ILDS Listserv >>> Message-ID: >>> >>> >> UTLOOK.COM >>> >> .PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>> >>> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >>> >>> A number of comments : >>> >>> 1. The ILDS needs to keep up with the times and consider how best to >>> use social media >>> >>> 2. All such media are open to abuse and that, regrettably, has to be >>> factored into our use of such media >>> >>> 3. If James' comments reflect a change of ILDS policy determined by the ILDS committee, I would rather it had be sent out first via The Herald for consultation. >>> >>> 4. Against my better judgement, I subscribe to both Facebook and Twitter. Contrary to my expectation when I subscribed to Facebook with a view to keeping in touch with far-fling family, I consider it useless. However, I have found it invaluable for special interest groups where info and photos can be shared - both helpful and enjoyable. I am still finding my feet with Twitter but, again, think it is a good forum for views on shared interest. >>> >>> 5. I personally would keep the list serve since there is no character limit. >>> >>> Hope these comments help >>> >>> Peter Baldwin >>> >>> >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>> On 7 Dec 2016, at 23:43, Bruce Redwine >> wrote: >>> >>> As a due-paying member of the ILDS, I think we need a clarification on the function of the ILDS listserv. Let me quote James Clawson, the incoming president of the ILDS, as he explains in the current Herald: >>> >>> In truth, we've been outgrowing the technology behind the listserv for a few years now, and it has with me become a distraction from the work it was meant to serve. We recommend to users that they move the discussion elsewhere- for example, to Facebook, where Pamela keeps up the public group, or to Twitter, where Charles maintains an active presence with @ DurrellSociety. With 130 members in the first of these and 1,600 followers of the latter, these groups serve far more active participants than the listserv, and they're a vibrant means to reach outward beyond the invisible walls of what could otherwise become an echo chamber. >>> >>> Now, what is Clawson really saying? The listserv, to which he almost never contributed, has become a "distraction." (If I recall correctly, Clawson made only one brief comment re the idea of Durrell's latent "homosexuality.") That is, he doesn't want to engage in any kind of serious discussion-for whatever reason. (So the advice of one academic-time is better spent writing articles for tenure and promotion.) And what was the listserv "meant to serve?" What is it now intended to become? Presumably a vehicle for a kind of Durrellian agitprop, which can be more effectively propagated on social networks such as Twitter and Facebook. And why did the listserv become an "echo chamber?" Because, with one notable exception, academics never contribute to the discussions. Yes, Clawson's reasoning is circular. >>> >>> I don't use social networks and never will. These are not forums for "discussion," as Clawson claims. They're places for dropping one-liners and postcard impressions. I'm very suspicious of those who use these outlets. I think that they pander to the craving for fame and recognition and that they promote lazy thinking, the kind president-elect Donald Trump indulges in. >>> >>> Bruce > > > _______________________________________________ > ILDS mailing list > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer _______________________________________________ ILDS mailing list ILDS at lists.uvic.ca https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds ------------------------------ End of ILDS Digest, Vol 116, Issue 5 ************************************