[Stöcker, Lars Fredrik]

Thank you Joonas, you are of course right. Sorry, I was very busy with other things this week. Today I am sitting and trying to get a shorter version, but I was thinking about concrete possible topics as well, otherwise the CfP will be too abstract. I will finish the draft today and Hanne will take a look at it, then we'll see if that fits or if anyone else tries to find a final draft version that suits better.

Thanks again, Fredrik

Lars Fredrik Stöcker
Researcher, Department of History and Civilization
European University Institute
Via Boccaccio 121
50133 Florence
ITALY

tel.: +39 388 175 98 56

[Stöcker, Lars Fredrik]

Dear all,

I have changed the CfP quite radically. Still, I do not present you any kind of finished version, it is just another draft. Hanne has promised to take a look at it and tidy up a bit, which is really good. I don't want to complicate everything, as we already on Wednesday have to come up with at least a draft for Vienna (Philipp Ther has a meeting with Prof. Schmale, who is apparently going to be one of the key note speakers). So I know that we can discuss forever, but we have to decide quite soon, how we are going to present our thoughts. Anyway, if you wnat then leave comments for the final versions, and if anyone has a much better idea maybe this person could write the final version as a kind of mixture of all our thoughts which is still concise.
Two things:
1) Thank you, Joonas, I used your thoughts and I agree that this was a lack in the first version - we have to mention very concrete examples of thinkable fields, otherwise no one will try to understand what this could be about. So I have stressed the empirical possibilities in order to open up the discussion (the fields I mentioned were just spontaneous ideas, they surely need elaboration or reformulation).
2) Another thing is that I have understood that my first version was narrowing the topic far too much and that it was reflecting only one line of thinking (thanks for your critique, Magnus, you were right) - but which apart from that maybe not is easy to include into another line of thinking. I have read a text from Ther about "transfer through negation" and I think that this is what you music/literatur guys had in mind (the text was from a special edition of the JMEH, 1/2007 about transfers of music), as you surely know it. I did not know this line of argumentation before, but understand that there could be other understandings of demarcation, very different from what I myself imagined it to be. For everyone who did not read the text: transfers of the concept of national operas and opera houses are observable in all of East Central Europe in the second half of the 19th century < it is a transfer, which would have been denied by the involved, as the idea was clearly demarcation and not any kind of convergence or assimilation.
Whatsoever, I decided to open up the meaning of demarcation, and it is always difficult to leave one's own line an integrate it without any ruptures with other contrasting views - but I am convinced that we need a very broad understanding of demarcation in order to get as many interesting papers as possible.

Have a nice evening, Fredrik

[Korhonen, Joonas]

Thanks Fredrik,

looks good!

 

J

---

From: grace...@googlegroups.com on behalf of Stöcker, Lars Fredrik
Sent: Mon 25/10/2010 20:16
To: grace...@googlegroups.com
Subject:

[Qvistgaard, Magnus]

Thank you for the draft, I think that it is good. I think, however, that we should add an example with cultural transfer or just ad the word culture/cultural products, in the part where we describe "Possible empirical fields" as it otherwise is a lot about politics, race, religion, etc. - not that it has nothing to do with culture, but I think we should make it explicit in order to attract people working with cultural transfer and to signal the plurality of possible topics for the conference.

 

- Magnus

 

     

---

Fra: grace...@googlegroups.com på vegne af Korhonen, Joonas
Sendt: ti 26-10-2010 09:41
Til: grace...@googlegroups.com
Emne: RE:

[Stöcker, Lars Fredrik]

Hello!

Ok, this is another version. Hanne has done a good job in helping me with structure and language, so now the text is more readable, I think. Magnus, I changed something in the first paragraph in order to open up a large variety of imagineable topics/transfers (hope the first paragraph is not overloaded now). The part about politics, race, religion etc. was more about reasons for demarcation in transfer processes and not about what is transferred. I hope things get a bit clearer now. Should we send it to Vienna then?

[Magnus Qvistgaard]

Dear all

 

I am perfectly happy with the cfp as it is now, so I think we should just send it. Fredrik and Hanne, you have done a great job.

Thank you!

 

best

Magnus

 

2010/10/26 Stöcker, Lars Fredrik <Fredrik...@eui.eu>

[Hanne]

Agree with Magnus, it's super now. Let's send it.

And to be fair: Fredrik is the diligent worker, not me.

Hanne