Nov 21Liked by Daniel Oppenheimer, Julianne Werlin
Great convo, you all made me more optimistic about what the future holds for humanities and the arts outside of academia. Looking forward to the new project mentioned by Sam as well.
This was bleak but also generative at the same time. I wonder about one point of intersection that didn't quite come up: should universities continue to prop up magazines, if they're better off as preservative institutions (compared to the experimental nature of new magazines)? Will they?
In my scant experience, maybe they shouldn't. I'm local to Duke (about 20 minutes west, and if you're ever offering audits, Julianne, I'll do what I can), and I have ties to the Divinity School there. Some of its students and leaders hosted a magazine for readings there, to mixed success: I could for certain hear the difference in the divinity student's work versus the outside contributors, namely in that the outside essays and poems were markedly better.
I haven't thought much about university run magazines (other than the online one that my brother just started running, which is an atypical one).
My initial instinct is that in theory it could be a really good opportunity for universities to fill the gap left by the decline of for profit magazines and newspapers. Unfortunately in practice it often seems like they're radically less ambitious than they could be. They don't really see themselves as potential participants in the larger discourse, and so they don't take the steps they'd need to take to step into that space. So I don't know.
You hit it: universities supply the financial opportunity, but not the creative execution. I'd bet that's less an issue with talent issue than with the institutional incentives: to keep a magazine where it is and not exactly test it.
Thanks! Yes, introduce yourself if you ever make it over to campus. I go to div school events occasionally when they overlap with med-red stuff, or involve my colleagues Thomas Pfau or David Aers, who are both involved there.
Very interesting idea. Yeah, I can't think of that many magazines of this kind. A lot that are basically glorified student publications but no one takes seriously. A vanishingly small number that are taken seriously, like The Chicago Review maybe. My feeling is that it would be really hard to transition from the basically student publication model to something more exciting... and neither students nor faculty would be that well equipped to do it. Maybe the increasing numbers of creative writing faculty could, but I feel like the environment (and very often their status as adjuncts) would discourage risk taking.
Nov 21Liked by Daniel Oppenheimer, Julianne Werlin
Will do, when I can. Small world on Dr. Pfau -- I'd sat in on the start of his "Theology and Poetry" conference early this year.
If I'm spitballing one solution, maybe the universities should hire working writers and editors to run and build these magazines, rather than primarily to teach in MFA programs (staff rather than faculty?). Those roles, if they're more secure than adjunct work, could give the editors more confidence for really pushing a magazine and attracting good contributors beyond the university's own pond. Anyway. I know there are funding issues I'm not addressing, but giving working writers secure writing work outside of the usual media landscape seems a better way to go for making inventive magazines.
I've often thought along similar lines, but 18 years in university communications has persuaded me that it's unlikely to happen. No incentive for it. It would have to be incentivized by a big gift from an unusually thoughtful donor.
You're probably right, not only about the universities' inertia but also the possible solution. The trouble now, as ever, is to find an unusually thoughtful, artistic billionaire, right?
Great convo, you all made me more optimistic about what the future holds for humanities and the arts outside of academia. Looking forward to the new project mentioned by Sam as well.
This was bleak but also generative at the same time. I wonder about one point of intersection that didn't quite come up: should universities continue to prop up magazines, if they're better off as preservative institutions (compared to the experimental nature of new magazines)? Will they?
In my scant experience, maybe they shouldn't. I'm local to Duke (about 20 minutes west, and if you're ever offering audits, Julianne, I'll do what I can), and I have ties to the Divinity School there. Some of its students and leaders hosted a magazine for readings there, to mixed success: I could for certain hear the difference in the divinity student's work versus the outside contributors, namely in that the outside essays and poems were markedly better.
"bleak but generative" should be my new tagline
I haven't thought much about university run magazines (other than the online one that my brother just started running, which is an atypical one).
My initial instinct is that in theory it could be a really good opportunity for universities to fill the gap left by the decline of for profit magazines and newspapers. Unfortunately in practice it often seems like they're radically less ambitious than they could be. They don't really see themselves as potential participants in the larger discourse, and so they don't take the steps they'd need to take to step into that space. So I don't know.
You hit it: universities supply the financial opportunity, but not the creative execution. I'd bet that's less an issue with talent issue than with the institutional incentives: to keep a magazine where it is and not exactly test it.
Thanks! Yes, introduce yourself if you ever make it over to campus. I go to div school events occasionally when they overlap with med-red stuff, or involve my colleagues Thomas Pfau or David Aers, who are both involved there.
Very interesting idea. Yeah, I can't think of that many magazines of this kind. A lot that are basically glorified student publications but no one takes seriously. A vanishingly small number that are taken seriously, like The Chicago Review maybe. My feeling is that it would be really hard to transition from the basically student publication model to something more exciting... and neither students nor faculty would be that well equipped to do it. Maybe the increasing numbers of creative writing faculty could, but I feel like the environment (and very often their status as adjuncts) would discourage risk taking.
Will do, when I can. Small world on Dr. Pfau -- I'd sat in on the start of his "Theology and Poetry" conference early this year.
If I'm spitballing one solution, maybe the universities should hire working writers and editors to run and build these magazines, rather than primarily to teach in MFA programs (staff rather than faculty?). Those roles, if they're more secure than adjunct work, could give the editors more confidence for really pushing a magazine and attracting good contributors beyond the university's own pond. Anyway. I know there are funding issues I'm not addressing, but giving working writers secure writing work outside of the usual media landscape seems a better way to go for making inventive magazines.
I've often thought along similar lines, but 18 years in university communications has persuaded me that it's unlikely to happen. No incentive for it. It would have to be incentivized by a big gift from an unusually thoughtful donor.
You're probably right, not only about the universities' inertia but also the possible solution. The trouble now, as ever, is to find an unusually thoughtful, artistic billionaire, right?