Carolyn Miller, Anne Freadman, some responses, and the joy of theory

 Theory for theory's sake is usually the sole realm of pure blooded nerds within a given research field. Thus, much as I may go on about genre and much as I will insert a discussion of genre into well-nigh everything, I could not come up with sufficient students for a full-on genre theory course if my life depended on it. To make matters worse, there is at present no dedicated journal for genre research, so the field has an uneasy existence publication wise—having to recurrently insert itself into scholarly debates about other topics. It's doable, but it requires a fair bit of intellectual dexterity and all but excludes genre theory. Publication wise, Genre research thus exists mainly in individual articles and in topical anthologies. Many are excellent, but genre theory has a hard life fitting into these formats.

So, it's a rare and treasured moment when you get the chance to dive into genre theory with other researchers. The Canadian Journal for Studies in Discourse and Writing/Rédactologie graciously hosted a section of genre theory in its most recent issue (here), and I was even more graciously invited to participate. The occasion was an article by Anne Freadman (here) containing a response to Carolyn Miller's pioneering study "Genre as Social Action" (1984) (here). 

If you are in the know about genre research, you'll see at once that this is one of the most interesting meetings you could ever establish. Both researchers belong in the category, I once called "Eminent women in genre research" and for good reason. Miller's article is usually seen as at least one of the central starting points for contemporary genre research. In my own article I try to frame her influence like this:

Carolyn Miller’s (1984) “Genre as Social Action,” the primary topic—or target—of Anne Freadman’s brilliant and thought-provoking article, holds a special place in genre research. If I pick up an unknown piece of research on genre, the first thing I do is look for Miller’s article in the bibliography. If it is not there, the text in my hand will probably be of little value to my work for lack of orientation. (161)

 Anne Freadman on her side is a later influence, but it's not unfair to say that the last decade or so has seen a meteoric rise in her reception. If you read contemporary genre research her  seminal concept "Uptake" is everywhere. So, if we see this as battle, it is a Clash of the (Genre) Titans. The exchange is everything you could possibly hope for. Freadman lucid, friendly, unexpected (as you would, paradoxically, expect from her) and completely to the point. Miller on her side (here) is brief, clear, and very good at knowing when to hold and when to fold. 

This is all brilliant. I've known for quite a while that the exchange would come out, and I've been terribly excited to read the whole thing. But the Canadian Journal for Studies in Discourse and Writing/Rédactologie knew what they had and chose to go over and beyond, so they added three more articles—each a commentary on Freadman's original article. The two other commentators, Janet Githrow and Charles Bazerman, are both forces to be recognized  in genre research with a long line of brilliant publications to their name.  I'm not going to say very much about their contributions at this point as I'm only beginning to figure out what their place in the debate is. Suffice it to say that both contributions display the intellectual rigor  and breadth of vision, I've come to expect from the authors.  I will learn a lot from both, once I get my head fully around them (Gilthrow here, and Bazerman here as well as mine here). It is worth noting that we were only given Freadman's article, not Miller's response, and I think that was a prudent move because it took away the urge to adjudicate between the two.

Be that as it may. The whole section now reads not "just" like an exchange between two brilliant researchers, but as an exploration of the foundation and scope of genre research. There is food for thought for many a year ahead. I cannot congratulate  the Canadian Journal for Studies in Discourse and Writing/Rédactologie enough for this section. 

Birthday greetings. Or: How people can use genre to be just lovely

My daughter, Elisabeth, turns six today. Under the Corona-virus lockdown we don't really have the opportunity to throw her a big party. She had been looking forward to a bash, so it was a bit of a downer. So, I called out across twitter to post pictures and gifs of nice animals for her to enjoy for her birthday.

If you ever need a pick-me-up because people can be awful, here's a little antidote showing that people can be lovely too. 500+ people taking time out to wish a girl they don't know happy birthday with pictures of cute animals. It's really quite overwhelming. Today, the birthday greeting is my favorite genre. Tele-Hugs from me for everyone.



Update a few hours later: We are now past 700 cuddly "birthday animal pictures". I am getting a very nice sort of genre overload.

Bad Joke Friday jokes

What is a blog on genre without a collection of bad jokes?

By consequence: over on Twitter it's what they call #BadJokeFriday. It seems quite necessary as we are all isolating from each others to avoid coronavirus. So, in the spirit of the day I've formed my daily reminder as a call for giggly bad jokes. You can see the tweet and the jokes first hand here. But here are the jokes the tweet draws out. I'll add more as they appear. I guarantee you a groany experience. 

Incidentally, (and not speaking too much about genre labels this time around), what is known as a "dad joke" in English is called an "onkelvits" (uncle joke) in Danish. I have no idea why lame jokes are parental in English, but avuncular in Danish.  

Update: I'm going to add in later jokes as they appear on my twitter timeline. Just for the giggles.

1. Q. What do you call a snowman’s dog? A. A slush puppy!

2. Man at vet:

"I think my dog is a blacksmith""Why do you think that?""Because every time I kick him he makes a bolt for the door" (Note: No pets were harmed during the making of this joke) 

3. A priest, a nun, and a rabbit walk into a bar. The rabbit says, "I think I might be a typo." 

4. Due to this year's increase in the twitter character limit, I need to rethink my seasonal joke about the Easter Rabbi 

 

 5.  Name 3 fish, beginning and ending with K

Killer Shark,

Kwiksave Haddock,

Kilmarnock - a plaice in Scotland

6. I would make a joke, but I broke my arm and I now have no sense of humerus. 

 7. Why have elephants got big ears? Because Noddy wouldn’t pay the ransom. (Literally the only joke I know)

 8. What do you call a fish with no eyes?A fsh.

9. Q. How many surrealists does it take to change a lightbulb? A fish. 

10.  So, the Past, the Present,and the Future all walked into a bar at the same time. The barman asked ‘Right gents, which of you was here first?’ It was Tense. 

11.   You want a bad joke? You asked for it. Q: What have Henry VIII and Winnie the Pooh in common?A: They have the same middle name.

12. Frog's car broke down.Got toad away. 

13. An Englishman, a Frenchman, an Italian and a German were sitting in a room. A man enters and asks "May I join you?" and the reply was... "Yes" "Oui" "Si" "Ja". 

14. Have you heard the one about the Republican Senator who thought Muffin the Mule was a sex offence? 

15. Due to the worsening situation, I've upgraded the musical accompaniment to my hand washing to Wagner's Ring Cycle. Doesn't leave much time for anything else, but safety first. 

16. Q. What do dogs out walking leave behind, that's long, brown and sticky? A. A stick! 

And here begins the new set of jokes ref the update above.

17. Q. How many guitarists does it take to play 'stairway to heaven?'

A. Apparently all of them. 

18. Professor X welcomes a new recruit: “Greetings, friend! What, pray, is your super skill??”

- “Why, Hindsight, professor!”

- “Well that’s not very useful, is it??” 

- “Ah, yes ... I see that now” 

19. My friend thinks girls in uniforms are sexy, but it's all the same to me! 

19½: My wife thinks men in camouflage are sexy, but I can't see it myself. 

20.  I can't find my hi-viz jacket.

- You should demand your money back.

21. How does a poorly baby sheep get to hospital? By Lambulance. 

22. What do you get if you cross an elephant with a rhino?...Elephino

23. I bought some shoes off a drug dealer- I don’t know what he laced them with but I’ve been tripping all day!

24. And God said to John “ come forth and you shall have eternal life” but John came fifth and won a toaster. 

25. Yesterday I changed a lightbulb, crossed the street and walked into a pub. My life's a joke.

26. John Travolta got Corona, he's got chills, they multiplying but now he's ok, turns out it was just a Saturday Night Fever... so he is Stayin' Alive.

27. Tribal chief hit by ceremonial chair falling from his attic. The headline: “People in grass houses shouldn’t stow thrones.”

28. My girlfriend left me because I was too insecure.

...
....
.....
......

No, wait, she's back, she was just fetching coffee. 

29. I was driving along & my boss rang & said 'You've been promoted' & I swerved.Then he rang up a 2nd time & said "You've been promoted again' & I swerved again. He rang a 3rd time & said 'You're managing director' & I went into a tree.I told the policeman I careered off the road. 

30. A friend in Germany tells me everyone’s panic buying sausages and cheese. They fear the Wurst Käse scenario. 

31. Why don't ants get sick? Because they have little anti bodies. 

32. Q: Where does the General keep his army?A: Up his sleeve-y. 

33. Someone keeps topping up my allotment with soil overnight - it's a mystery.The plot thickens. 

35. My wife had just found out I replaced our bed with a trampoline. She hit the roof. 

36. -Waiter, there’s a fly in my soup!

 -I know sir, it’s Fly Soup. 

37. "Your test results have come back." "OK, doc, what's the verdict?""You have acute angina.""Look, I came here for help, not be be ogled at!"

38. "Doctor, I think I'm allergic to leather!" "Why's that?" "Every time I go to bed with my shoes on, I wake up with a headache." 

39. "Doctor, I think I'm allergic to tonic water"

"Why's that?"

"No matter what I mix it with, I end up stone drunk!"

Genre in the Climate Debate - longer presentation

In the previous post I worked through a presentation of the upcoming De Gruyter-anthology on Genre in the Climate Debate which I have co-edited with Christel Sunesen. With help from good friends over at Twitter, it came out fairly ok. I also need to write a longer presentation. Below is my first full draft. Comments welcome. 

Benefits

•  The volume establishes a dynamic interplay between two high-level research fields: humanistic climate studies and genre research
• The volume offer an understanding of the way the structural and ideological issues in the debate over anthropogenic climate change are determined by the genres in play in the debate.
•  The volume continues key developments in contemporary genre research, in particular the use of genre in political campaigning and the uptake of genre information and action across genre systems.

Aims and Scope

The greatest conundrum concerning anthropogenic climate change may prove to be in the humanities and the social sciences. How is it even possible that highly exigent information for which overwhelming evidence exists does not make an immediate and strong impact on ideologies, policies, and life practices across the globe? This volume offers an intriguing and enlightening new approach to the the climate debate by taking it as a question of genre. Genres are the cultural categories that structure human understanding and communication, and genre research therefore offers a central key to unlocking the conundrum. From a genre perspective, if there is one thing the climate debate demonstrates, it is the inertia inherent in genre use. Patterns of understanding and interpretation once established seem to carry on even when they have long outlived their usefulness.

However, it is also evident that uses of genre can work to change this inertia.Genres play a vital role in human interaction, as we use them to learn, express ourselves, and to act. How individual actors utilize or manipulates genres determines to what extent knowledge of climate change spreads from the scientific community to the public, how it is debated, and to what extent it leads to positive action. 

 Authors

Amy Devitt, Charles Bazerman, Josh Kuntzman, Graham Smart, Matthew Falconer, Sune Auken, Mette Møller, Esben Bjerggaard Nielsen, Felix Paulsen, Mary Jo Reiff, Anis Bawarshi, Ashley Rose Melenbacher, Brad Melenbacher.

Genre in the Climate Debate. Promotional text sketch.

Later this year my edited volume Genre in the Climate Debate will be published by De Gruyter. I have edited it with my very talented and extremely friendly colleague Christel Sunesen. You can find her webpage here. A part of preparing such a volume is promotion and I am a right fool at writing these auto-panegyrical genres, so here's my first sketch for a brief promotional text. How does this sound?

The volume offers an intriguing and enlightening new approach to the climate debate by taking it as a question of genre. Genres play a vital role in human interaction, as we use them to learn, to express ourselves, and to act. Thus, genres, and the use of genres by individual actors, determine how knowledge of climate change spreads or not from the scientific community to a broader public and how it is debated and acted on.

Update: A good friend on Twitter, Alexander King (or @ASElliotKing in twitter-speak), made his suggestions in the form of a picture.

Update 2: Thanks to good friends and kind twitterati like Alexander the blurb now looks like this. Comments still welcome.

The volume offers an intriguing and enlightening new approach to the climate debate by taking it as a question of genre. Genres play a vital role in human interaction, as we use them to learn, express ourselves, and to act. How individual actors utilize or manipulate genres determines to what extent knowledge of climate change spreads from the scientific community to the public, how it is debated, and to what extent it leads to positive action.