Post-SCMS thoughts

(I took this pic of Independence Hall on the way out of town Sunday morning. It was hard to get a nice pic that didn't have security in it. Later today or tomorrow I will probably post other photos from the trip.)

I am taking a break from catching up on my grading and working on my dissertation, to reflect on my experiences with SCMS last week in Philly. I probably should have done this sooner, to catch the post-conference traffic, but oh well. I've been in withdrawal. And hiding.

Random thoughts

• Michael offers a nice summary of a few links to SCMS blog posts.

• Chris is right to note that the "themes" of the conference are starting to wear thin. "Architecture" was the theme this year and, honestly, I'm still not sure why it was chosen. Yes, the conference was held inside the first "International Modernist" skyscraper in the US, but wouldn't have Chicago (home of Burnham, Sullivan, Frank Lloyd Wright) last year been a better choice for that theme? Something like "democracy" or "media as democratic space" (debatable, of course) seems more appropriate--not to mention timely. In any case, it did not add much to the substance of the conference. As Chris also pointed out, architecture wasn't really talked about by anyone, though it was slapped arbitrarily on some titles of panels to fit the theme figuratively.

• Chris is also right to suggest that there are too many panels. There's no time for a lunch break, and panels run up until 7 at night. In a weird way, it encourages people to skip more panels, because people are forced to make time away from them, and the schedule's so hectic to begin with.

• The conference should consider cutting back the schedule and becoming even more competitive in its selection process. I think this would make for a better conference--the work would be even stronger and more people would be able to attend more events without feeling overwhelmed by all the possibilities. And I say all of this as someone who might well be left out in the cold as a result of a smaller conference.

• That potential for more intimacy may be one good thing to come out of having the conference in Tokyo next year--though I will have to rely on second-hand accounts for that.

• Between SCMS and the Film Indiana Conference in September, I am only just now beginning to appreciate how delicate the construction of conferences is--and how difficult it is to organize particular atmospheres.

• Scott and I were pleased to see Cinephilia in the Age of Digital Reproduction, Vol. 1, already being promoted by Wallflower Press. I am proud of that collection, but I've always been a little personally ambivalent about it because I feel like--as co-editor on the cover--I'm largely benefiting from the hard work of others, so I've tended to downplay it on the blog. Still, it was very satisfying to see all the efforts of everyone on it starting to pay off, and it will be even more exciting in the fall to see everyone's work in print (and I found out we will also get a hardcover edition, too!).

• It was great to finally meet Chuck, Zach and Ted in person at the cinephilia workshop. Its a reminder of just how special an occasion SCMS can be.

• My two separate presentations were a textbook example of how important it is to be on a panel/workshop with people who share very similar interests. Not only can the panelists/workshop participants feel more connected with one another, but the Q&A can be so much more lively. My presentation on Song of the South fans was very uncomfortable because I felt out of place talking about issues of race and fandom on a panel of "animation" experts, broadly-defined. Its tough paper for me anyway because of the subject matter, and I didn't feel I was presenting on something people were invested in.

• On the other hand, the cinephilia workshop was a more lively discussion. It was a pre-constituted group, with Scott, myself, Ted, Catherine Russell and Robert Burgoyne. Ironically, I personally did better on the Q&A for my SOS paper than in the cinephilia workshop (I think in part because I've been more engaged with that research recently), but overall the vibe was much more positive at the workshop. Most of the discussion ended up being about blogging, even though only Ted was explicitly talking about that. I mentioned a couple of times that my paper began as a blog post, but it wasn't about blogging per se (unlike my original idea for a workshop topic--the "cinephiliac practice of everyday life," which I just couldn't get to with the exams this semester).

• I'll get back to that project some day--but I just do not have the time to do it justice right now. My main priority will be the dissertation, though I also want to get an essay on PT Anderson done in the breaks during the prospectus drafting, mostly because its so timely right now. Also, I found out I have to spend most of the summer working on German foreign language requirements (don't get me started on German departments) and teaching Public Speaking, so I can pay for my living expenses while doing the German requirement. Anyway, that was the time I was going to devote to the "cinephiliac practice of everyday life."

• (One day graduate schools will recognize that foreign language requirements are not only irrelevant to many graduate careers, but are actually deeply counter-productive, even destructive, for the student in so far as the time consumed [I would use the term "wasted")].

• Wow. That was a tangent. I guess you can see why I hadn't been looking forward much to SCMS, and one of the reasons why I was so melancholy for much of it. Not being able to do anything because of $$ was another big reason. SCMS felt only like a professional obligation for me this year, and not also as a chance to see old friends or take a break from the daily university grind. Do not misunderstand me. I'm deeply grateful to even have a chance to go to the conference. And I love the professional side of SCMS--it's very thrilling. I am an unapologetic hardcore academic. But I've also looked forward to the conference in years past because it was a chance to catch up with friends past and present. For some reason, I could not enjoy that side of it this year.

• I think the bleakness of the impending job market is also beginning to take its toll on me as well--and the atmosphere of the conference brings that out in particular.

• The one good thing about not being able to go to Tokyo next year is that I will get a break from the grind of going. And in 2010--if I am lucky enough to get accepted to LA (a big if)--I will be reinvigorated again.