Skip to content

Another K’zoo down

10 May, 2009

Another K’zoo Down

Wow. That was a different Zoo. Really fun, but exhausting. And it definitely confirmed my theory that having papers entirely finished before the conference starts is really the best way of doing things. Still, the evil back-to-back panels went well (the panels were not evil, only the scheduling). Or so I’m told. A friend asked for a copy of my paper, so I am chuffed. The other papers on my panel were very good, and I especially liked the one with the number-crunching, because it was something we haven’t seen much of in the past. The roundtable was also very good, and a couple people told me after that they had found it thought-provoking. Went to a couple of interesting medieval panels, where at least there was a Carolingian question, if no actual Carolingian papers. That needs to stop. Also went to a wonderful panel on antisemitism in the 12th C, where I heard three very good papers, one of which talked about revenants and mentioned vampires and zombies. I LOVED that paper. The rest of the panels were sort of blurry. This may have had something to do with the fact that I was still working on my paper and also dealing with lame SLAC business.

Socially, this was a wonderful Zoo. I’m really sad that I missed the Babel party, which I think was the primo event, and the Bonnie Wheeler party, where I could have seen a dear friend I haven’t seen since the Berks conference. But the blogger meetup was fab. I saw Rebel Lettriste, Carl Pyrdum, Dame Eleanor Hull, Medieval Woman, Steve Muhlberger, Stephen Chrisomalis, Vaulting and Vellum, Matt Gabriele, Janice Liedl, Curtana, Notorious, PhD, Girl Scholar, Dr Virago, Heu mihi, Jennifer Lynn Jordon, Dr. Moonbeam, Lisa Carnell, Prof de Breeze (I think), owlfish, and a few people I never got to meet. It was great fun, and I spent much of the conference with some of these folks — and some I didn’t get to see nearly enough of. One of my favorite things was realizing how many real life friends and collaborative colleagues I’ve met through blogging. And just how many of them I felt like I knew when I saw them, because we have been talking to each other now for years. Now if only Mug Shots would serve decent pastries…

I also got to spend some, but again, not nearly enough, time with with my Beach U peeps. It was so very nice to see them, and again, to be reminded of just how very lucky I have been in my life. So many of the people I saw have somehow or other been instrumental in making me the person and the scholar I am, and having them in my life makes me want to keep up whatever good work I am doing, and fix the things I probably should. I also ran into other online friends, and missed some others. I never managed to see Jeffrey Jerome Cohen at the dance, and Scott Nokes was only there for a drive-by. Never did see Mike Drout. Many people asked where the hell Cranky Professor was, too.

I was also able to spend some time with a wonderful postgrad who convinced me to come to a conference at St Andrews this summer, and a dear friend with whom I always enjoy spending time. Plus, a bunch of us went out on Saturday night for dinner and talked slash and fanfic and sf/f for hours. Saw other colleagues I see only rarely, and one with whom I may try to plan a panel for next time. I should do it if only because he’s an amazing dancer. In fact, at one point I was dancing with him and two other people who often work on things Carolingian, and two of them were really good and fun dancers. So basically, a very good conference.

And right now, I’m sitting in the lobby of the K’zoo Radisson, procrastinating on the marking. And just plain exhausted. Won’t get home to Dabbaville till something like 1:00 in the morning. Ugh

10 Comments leave one →
  1. 11 May, 2009 2:05 am

    Loved the blogging panel (though I missed the beginning of it). Good Qs afterward, too.By the by, by way of my classics pal, Crispinus, re: the opposite of pseudonymous:I guess it would have to be etymonymous, if it existed. Or you could call say that a writer is writing under his or her autonym.

  2. 11 May, 2009 2:30 am

    I love the notion of planning panels with people on the basis of their dancing ability. Mind, it would keep me out of any panel ever, but it’s a great approach to things.

  3. 11 May, 2009 4:52 am

    I had really hoped to run into you, but I wasn’t able to stay for the Dance, and we had panel, presentation and poster all day on Thurs, which crammed too many things into Fri. Hopefully next year the schedule will work better. I missed Sat p.m. dinner very much.

  4. 11 May, 2009 6:23 am

    Michael — we missed you, too. Lisa and Mac couldn’t make it this year, but Lisa and Steve did, plus some others — and again, the convo was sf/f (lots of Bujold), slash and the history thereof, fanfic … and GRRM probably killed another Stark, because someone didn’t know the rule!

  5. 11 May, 2009 6:24 am

    Kate — it was wonderful meeting you! And thanks for coming to the panel — I’m glad you enjoyed it. I think autonymous is the best-sounding. I’m using it!Susan — I think we can be broad in our dancing critiques!

  6. 11 May, 2009 11:33 am

    Drat! How did I not see that conference when it was a mere Call for Papers? I would have been right there. I may yet be. In fact looking at the papers I may have to be. In which case I would see you there I imagine…

  7. 11 May, 2009 2:07 pm

    Panel submissions for next year are due Friday, Jon! I was thinking we need a couple of Carolingian panels …

  8. 12 May, 2009 11:44 am

    Blimey! That's really not very far away. Are you putting something together? I couldn't manage to organise a session but I can supply abstracts for any of these papers I've just dreamed up:(i) Reconquest agendas and Arabic petitioners in the Chronicles of Asturias and the court of León (recycled IHR paper, but, hey, improved since then)(ii) Agent of change: Borrell II of Barcelona and the approach of the Year 1000 (intro to the book I'll eventually write on this)(iii) The Carolingian succession to the Visigothic fisc on the Spanish March (new research, may not work, but something I recently decided I ought to have a look at)Of these I'd prefer (ii) or (iii) and they probably fit your agendas better too. Let me know if you want abstracts (or if someone else does!).

  9. 12 May, 2009 1:20 pm

    I think it’s going to have a title like ‘power and patronage’ or ‘courts and courts’, so any would work!

  10. 14 May, 2009 1:25 am

    Well, then, you have mail…

your thoughts?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: