In latter year I have moved into genre research, variably called “genre studies” and “genre analysis” by differing schools. It is a fascinating interdisciplinary field, basically playing into any scholarly field, due to the proliferation of genre. Thus the concept enables a dialogue in which people talk about their own topics and from their own specialties at the same as they reach out to other fields through a concept, genre, that is present everywhere. I usually name this a “discipline based interdisciplinarity”; some of this is unfolded in our interdisciplinary open access anthology Genre and …, but there is still much left to learn. An inspiring – and somewhat baffling feature – about genre is that we are extremely adept at understanding and using genre without ever realizing that’s what we are doing. Thus, learning about a genre is very often re-learning in the sense that you get to know what you know already. I worked through this point in my article on “Genre and Interpretation”, but it keeps puzzling me. Other than that, as a genre researcher I am a theory head and delve into the epistemology and heuristics of genre with particular energy.
My curation period will thus be focused on questions of genre. But since genre is everywhere in scholarship and society this is not much of a limitation. So go ahead and shoot from all possible angles, I´ll try to catch as many balls as I can. Due do my extensive engagement with PhD education you can also expect some tweets on doctoral studies, and I am most happy to discuss any topic relating to that. I have a troubling weakness for puns, but I’ll try to keep that in check as best I can during my week.
A little extra information: I hold an academic degree which is not well-known in the Anglophone world, the so-called Habilitation or Dr.Habil. It’s a heavy-duty post-doctoral degree only awarded for a field-changing piece of work. I am exceedingly proud and boastful about this degree, and, by consequence, exceedingly annoyed about the fact that my Anglophone colleagues assume it to be a PhD. This is, of course, slightly paradoxical given how proud I am of the PhDs educated at “my” school.
By training and employment I am a literary scholar specialized in Danish literature. Thus, much of my work is on Danish topics, in Danish, and thus unavailable to an Anglophone readership. This includes a monograph on the Danish Eulogy, my habilitation on Danish cultural icon N.F.S. Grundtvig, a co-written book (with my colleague Svend Skriver) on Danish poet and essayist Søren Ulrik Thomsen, an aggressive pamphlet on Danish University Politics and a variety of articles on many of topics. Literary and otherwise.
My life as a scholar of Danish literature has given me a hesitation towards the dominance of English in the academy and in international relations. I know that much is gained, but quite a few problems arise too. As other forms of dominance this one is often unrecognized and naturalized to the dominant as well as the subordinate group, and it has radical consequences for both. Some of us call this #anglonormativity, and I might tweet a bit about that as well.
Anyway: Looking forward to the experience. CY on Twitter!