Occasional updates from the Nonhuman Narratives Symposium at Bournemouth University, 27th April 2011. Refresh page for updates.
16:55 – The Nonhuman Narratives Symposium is over… Thanks to all the speakers, and Bronwen Thomas and Julia Round for organising a great event!
16:48 – Closing remarks by Julia Round.
16:39 – Quick Q&A session, opening question on the stylistic guidelines of publisher and it’s potential influence on (rewriting of) narrative.
16:35 – Killers are always introduced with full name, thereafter referred to by surname, whilst victims are sometimes introduced by full name on first mention, and thereafter by first name only.
16:31 – CG now discussing sensationalism and creative use of metaphors.
16:30 – CG points out Cawthorne never references his sources, but also provides information he can not have had access to such as thought processes.
16:28 – CG analysing reality of stories vs fictionalisation of the stories in the narratives.
16:18 – CG discusses intertextuality of serial killer narratives.
16:15 – CG critiques Cawthorne’s books on real life (serial) killers.
16:14 – CG opens with a plug for the Crime Studies Network.
16:14 – Final speaker is Christiana Gregoriou from University of Leeds on “A Critical Stylistic Approach to True Crime Serial Killer Narratives”.
16:06 – Q&A session. First question on links to dehumanisation of individuals and tabloid journalism, and how this absconds perpetrators of responsibility.
15:58 – SK now describing British film classification and what causes films to be rejected. The two he analyses were the only fictional films rejected in the given time period (2008-2009).
15:56 – SK is discussing monsters in Murder Set Pieces, and Grotesque.
15:45 – Long disclaimer about films he is analysing, which are banned in the UK.
15:43 – Final panel of the day. First up is Shaun Kimber from Bournemouth University on complexity and ambiguity in contemporary neo-nasty horror films.
15:22 – Brief Q&A before more coffee…
15:18 – AP critical of some interpretations of Balthazar’s religious symbolism (donkey stands in for Christ, which in turn stands in and dies for humanity), which she argues does not do justice to Bresson’s concern for depicting suffering of the animal.
15:15 – AP discussing religious symbolism in Bresson’s films, noting that he was a devout catholic, but resented clerics.
15:06 – AP showing examples of Mouchette.
14:58 – AP showing examples of Balthazar.
14:55 – AP argues Bresson’s films are creaturely narratives, describes wooden nature of human characters and the mechanical way in way they were required to deliver pre-scripted lines.
14:48 – Back to panels, session three being kicked off by Anat Pick from University of East London on “Animal Saintliness: Creaturely Life in the Films of Robert Bresson”. (Note that The other speaker in this panel, Claire Molloy from University of Brighton was unable to attend.)
14:39 – DH paper creating long discussion… now quick break before next panel.
14:19 – Q&A session.
14:14 – DH drawing on Jakob vin Uexküll’s notion of Umwelt (animals’ perceptual cues and experience of their surrounding environment) to critique Laika and We3 – very interesting.
13:56 – DH’s handout accompanying the talk: http://db.tt/78L3Sln
13:46 – DH using transmedial narratology to ground his critique, linked to “what it’s like”.
13:43 – Examples:
The Complete Maus
Pride of Baghdad
Laika, and We3
Moving from course-grained representations of nonhuman experiences to fine-grained representations of nonhuman experiences.
13:40 – Drawing on a number of graphic narratives featuring nonhuman animals as characters, which he poses as test cases along a continuum. Methods for representing nonhuman consciousness.
13:37 – DH discussing how he got to research narratives. Linking to structuralist linguistic models, updated with pragmatics and discourse theory. Interested in post-cartesian theories of the mind.
13:32 – Start of plenary session, keynote by David Herman from Ohio State University on “Stories, Minds, and Media: Nonhuman Experiences in Graphic Narratives”.
13:00 – Lunch workshops and exhibitions
12:29 – Lunch break, includes exhibitions and workshops by members of Narrative Research Group at Bournemouth University.
12:21 – Q&A: how faithful are the fan knitters? BC says groups discuss everything, it is allowed, if not officially sanctioned.
12:18 – BC concludes by discussing micro-economy created by fan knitters trading their products. Extended communities and engagement created around the production of such yarns. Commodification of fan production.
12:13 – Fan knitting linked to their own and existing remediation of texts.
12:09 – Fan knitters engage in online discussions around narratives of films and TV series. BC using examples of True Blood, and demonstrates how objects produced are sometimes directly connected to the narratives.
12:08 – BC discussing organised knit-alongs, example of vampire socks.
12:07 – Fans conduct close readings of what they are fans of and apply those to the objects they produce.
12:04 – BC notes the majority of this fan practice takes place in online handicraft communities, which are feminine spaces, rather than the traditional online communities / masculine spaces. Links to gendered fan practice.
12:03 – Knitting creates social space or groupings for fandom.
12:01 – BC exploring role of Debbie Stoller in resurgence of knitting, including interest among men (though they still remain a minority). Linking to continuum of fanish activity.
12:00 – BC discussing the large female fan base of vampires, thus female crafts natural extension.
11:55 – Next up is Brigid Cherry from St Mary’s University on knitting, vampires and goth fandom.
11:51 – Finished showing clips, now Q&A.
11:41 – Connie and Carla looks amusing, adding to list of films to watch.
11:37 – CB using case study of Connie and Carla film from 2004, showing clip.
11:34 – CB discussing assimilation of a character on to the clothing. Argues this aspect is under researched.
11:32 – CB using examples from films where erasing up is key to narrative, eg Devil Wears Prada, and where dressing up is more disguised.
11:31 – CB describing characters’ physical vs emotional journey, can be separate components in narrative, but interconnected for the story cause.
11:30 – CB critiques costumes relation to narrative.
11:27 – CB relates talk to screenwriting.
11:27 – Costume is means of understanding the character that wears them and as extension how they feel.
11:25 – Next session has started. First up is Craig Batty from Bournemouth University on “Costume as Character Arc”.
11:15 – JF says wooden box at front has mind of it’s own… Invites us to play with it during coffee break.
11:13 – Q&A session. Question from audience: does it matter to the machines what they are creating? JF: jokes when machines take over the world, I can say I was on their side.
11:08 – JF concludes that he and his machines tune each other…
11:05 – JF: How does human minds incorporate machines?
10:57 – JF discussing Dada poem, cutting words from a newspaper and pulling them from a hat to create a poem. Collage brought to writing.
10:55 – Use of devices for fortune telling.
10:54 – JF exploring writer delegation to machine (not just electronic devices, but also things such as tarot cards).
10:53 – Slightly more abstract this than JD’s talk…
10:52 – JF exploring the agency in machines and their influence or potential influence on writing processes. Giving examples of machine produced text.
10:49 – JF discussing putting electronics into wooden boxes for creating audio experiences… Writers collaborating with devices. Device oriented narrative.
10:45 – JF puts a small wooden box at the front…
10:44 – Joe Flintham setting up.
10:42 – Good question from audience about meat production that goes into pet food… Cats and dogs can’t go meat free on Mondays.
10:40 – Next up: Joe Flintham, Bournemouth University on “The Machine Starts: The Question of Agency in Computer-Mediated Narratives”.
10:35 – JD argues FoE campaign is problematic as it reinforces notion of animals as consumer commodities. Now Q&A. JD reinforces argument that meat is aspirational.
10:32 – Defetishises the food production process. Focus on gift regulation rather than individual action. Consumer framed as citizen.
10:29 – Friends of the Earth regulating unsustainable farming practices, different campaign – also linked to social impact. Link animal, environmental and human justice issues.
10:28 – JD draws on Val Plumwood to critique excessive individualism, recommending a more wholistic approach to campaigns that involves humans, animal and “structural origins” of production.
10:21 – “if animals are alive, they cannot be meat” Carol Adams, 1990.
10:16 – Global livestock sector contributes 18% of global greenhouse gas emissions.
10:15 – JD discussing campaigns from Peta2 and Friends of the earth.
10:13 – Julie Doyle, University of Brighton on “Consuming the climate: re-thinking meat and dairy consumption in the politics of climate change”.
10:11 – Bronwen Thomas and Stuart Allan with welcome address.
Leave a Reply