Jonathan Kramnick

@profdgd That's an interesting debate to have. I think you need to have a practice to interact from, what I call the ordinary or everyday practice of the discipline. But I am not trying to "return" literary studies to anything. I'm celebrating what it *is* and what it *will be*

@Kramnickomicon I’m just not sure of thr claim that we need to respect disciplines in order to have an interactive interdisciplinarity. Am I putting too much emphasis on the last paragraph?

A bit too much melancholy mandarin in this one for my tastes. The sort of hand wringing both Kramnick & Clune perform ultimately seek to "return" literary studies -- to a thing it never was and a thing with a limiting future.

@profdgd Did you read my piece? I defend the kind of interdisciplinarity that puts literary studies and other humanistic fields on equal footing with the social sciences and the sciences. My critique is of scientistic reductionism and the corporate reorganization of the university.

@Kramnickomicon Because defense tropes imply attack. And I don’t believe interdisciplinarity is an attack.

@profdgd Um, ok, why not? And what do you mean "at the level of the discipline"?

@Kramnickomicon I don’t buy into the defense trope. At least not at the level of discipline.

@profdgd Here are the last few sentences to the preface to my new book, Paper Minds:

@profdgd fwiw, I don't seek to return literary studies to anything. My point is to defend literary studies, in all of its pluralistic glory: the kind done by you, me, Kyla, Shiela, our colleagues, and our students.

@mikers86 again, I don't respond on twitter ever, so I don't know if I did that correctly. Please reorder and read from top to bottom

@mikers86 corporate reorganizing of the university. I'm sure you're against that too. Looking forward to meeting you in person some time and hearing about your work.

@mikers86 several disciplines, with each assumed to have its own authority, method, ethos, and rationale. The point of my column was to criticize efforts to agglomerate humanities disciplines together under the auspices of scientistic "innovation" and "big ideas," part of the larger

@mikers86 In fact, I've done a fair bit myself (lit/philosophy/science). More importantly, I encourage that kind of work in my students and applaud it in my colleagues. I am a multi-disciplinary pluralist. My argument is that interdisciplinarity is best modeled as a meeting of

@mikers86 Hi Michael, I don't use twitter ever, so I don't know if I'm doing this right. Thank you for your response. I think we agree more than disagree. My column and my new book are not intended to keep the discipline of English rigid or narrow. I very much admire interdisciplinary work

Voting for @cejarvis's Exquisite Masochism for the #IHEreaderschoice

is this how to vote for@cejarvis's book? twitter.com/gmbritton/stat…

@VirginTrains I'm in the United States.

@VirginTrains I need a copy of receipt for tickets purchased online.

@ncecire @noeljackson Hi folks. I don't tweet much. ELH has a fb page. Please like it. I'll try to get the assoc eds. to set up twitter too.

@3QD insidehighered.com/news/2013/02/2…

@Ted_Underwood @ncecire @goldstoneandrew Thanks. I'm all thumbs with twitter, so I don't know where this is showing up, btw.

@S_Insley_H yes, I never tweet! Someone alerted me to this thread and I give folks the deets.

@Ted_Underwood @ncecire @goldstoneandrew interdisciplinarity

@Ted_Underwood @ncecire @goldstoneandrew yes, the quote did seem out of the blue. See newappsblog.com/2012/02/new-ap… for more on what I meant viz