Showing posts with label Dr. Joseph T. Thomas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dr. Joseph T. Thomas. Show all posts

Thursday, January 16, 2020

“Hansel & Gretel: Fairy Tale to Opera”


Two singers from the San Diego Young Artists 
Opera Program performing a piece 
from the opera of "Hansel & Gretel"

On January 14th I had the wonderful opportunity to see Dr. Joseph Thomas and Dr. Nicolas Reveles’ lively discussion, “Hansel & Gretel: Fairy Tale to Opera” as part of San Diego Opera’s 65th year of the “Taste of Opera” series. Thomas and Reveles discussed the roots of Hansel and Gretel, both the Grimm Brothers’ version and the story in the Humperdinck opera. They explored the dark undertones of the story and how it turned into the (somewhat less dark) story it is known as today. Two talented singers from the San Diego Young Artists Opera Program performed a piece from the opera.

As Reveles beautifully puts it, Humperdinck perfectly illustrates children left to their own devices, without the scrutiny of parents, as seen by the two singers bickering with one another as they dance around the stage. This can be seen with Hansel and Gretel joyously skipping around the stage and fighting over who should do the laundry.

Nicolas Reveles playing a piano
piece from the Hansel & Gretel Opera

I don’t know much about operas, but I know a bit about the Grimm Brothers, so I was excited. The original opera was written in the nineteenth century by composer Engelbert Humperdinck, based on the Grimm brothers’ popular fairy tale.

The origins of “Hansel and Gretel” are a bit unclear, but Thomas says estimates lie around 1315, the time of the Great Famine in Europe. During this time there were many historic tales of cannibalism and child abandonment, two ideas present in the story of Hansel and Gretel. This popular tale may have been inspired by Charles Perrault’s fairy tale Hop o’ My Thumb.

Nicolas Reveles and Joseph Thomas

In the time of Grimm’s tales, it was not uncommon for many children to be abandoned due to lack of food, so Hansel and Gretel’s tale, at least the first part of the tale, is not as far-fetched as it may seem to modern audiences.

Although fairy tales are modernly associated with children, according to Reveles, fairy tales were originally written as a historical and theoretical study for adults. Grimm’s tales were a very new concept, as the common idea of literature was the it should come from Greek and Roman tales, an idea popularized by King Louis XIV. This was known as “The Quarrel of the Ancients and the Moderns”. 


Although Grimm’s first edition highlighted a motif of child abandonment, this didn’t sit well with audiences, so the mother was edited as a step-mother, and as Dr. Thomas states, editors argued that “a German mother would never do that [abandon her children]”. I am curious if this started the tradition of stepmothers that we see in many Disney movies and the fairy tales they were inspired by.

Hansel and Gretel has some interesting themes. For one, the natural world, or the woods Hansel and Gretel enter, is a world of mysticality, poetry, and fairy tales, perhaps as an escape from the restrictive world the two live in at their own home. These stories had many educational themes throughout which may not have been as obvious being a modern reader.

This was truly such a fun talk and I learned so much.


-SS

Wednesday, November 6, 2019

Dr. Mary Galbraith’s “The Deictic Imaginary: Literature as Creation”



On Wednesday, October 30th, The National Center for the Study of Children’s Literature at SDSU had the honor of hosting Dr. Mary Galbraith for her talk, “The Deictic Imaginary: Literature as Creation.”

Our director, Dr. Joseph Thomas, began by thanking all who have made the event possible: the library (especially Linda Salem and Markel Tumlin), the graduate assistants (Sofia and Ashley), and Dr. Mary Galbraith herself. He then introduced our guest, saying she is a woman who works to “respect the child” in her research. The full text of his introduction is included below:

Dr. Mary Galbraith has always struck me as the prototypical SoCal woman. A salient exemplar, really. You see, Mary grew up in Los Angeles, shuttling between her Southern California home and a home across the sea, in London. After finishing high school, Mary headed a little south to UC Irvine, attending that legendary school during its first year. Afterwards, she left her SoCal home for Berkeley, where her worldly, cosmopolitan, SoCal grooviness was enriched and complicated by the student protests going on during 1969, the high-water mark of the 60’s youthful, utopian hopefulness. I’m put in mind of the famous passage from Hunter S. Thompson’s Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas:

There was madness in any direction, at any hour. If not across the Bay, then up the Golden Gate or down 101 to Los Altos or La Honda. . . . You could strike sparks anywhere. There was a fantastic universal sense that whatever we were doing was right, that we were winning. . . . And that, I think, was the handle—that sense of inevitable victory over the forces of Old and Evil. Not in any mean or military sense; we didn’t need that. Our energy would simply prevail. There was no point in fighting—on our side or theirs. We had all the momentum; we were riding the crest of a high and beautiful wave. . .

But on that cresting wave came, as Mary explains in an interview, “tanks on campus; helicopters flying over dropping tear gas.” She got out, had a kid, lived her life, returning to school in the 80s, eventually settling at SUNY Buffalo, a spot that couldn’t be more different than SoCal.

But Mary flourished there, working as a graduate assistant for the Cognitive Science Graduate Group. She worked on her doctorate in English while taking courses in philosophy, psychology, computer science, child language acquisition. The searching intelligence that came of age traveling back and forth between London and Los Angeles, primed for difference, for unexpected confluences and concatenations began developing the interdisciplinary approach we’d come to call “Childhood Studies,” a theoretical and practical academic approach that puts into conversation the resonant insights of literature, psychology, history, anthropology, and neurobiology as a means of better understanding childhood, a time in which the child’s varied experiences of the world has yet to calcify into rigid categories. Although I wouldn’t call her a Romantic (not to her face), she does respect the child and its novel experience of the still-new world, Wordsworth’s “Mighty Prophet! Seer blest! […] “whose exterior semblance” (if you’ll forgive my shift into second person)


[…] doth belie
Thy Soul's immensity;
Thou best Philosopher, who yet
dost keep
Thy heritage, thou Eye among the
blind,
That, deaf and silent, read’st the
eternal deep,

Haunted for ever by the eternal
mind[.]

Mary’s ranging, complex, and groundbreaking scholarly work serves the interests of – as she puts it – “feeling from the other side,” of understanding as best we’re able, the child’s existential situation from the child’s perspective, a critical paradigm suggestive of what Peter Hunt would come to call “childist” criticism. Mary’s work is marked by a desire to articulate the child's experience as rigorously as possible using all the theoretical and scientific and literary critical tools available to us. Today, we’ll get a taste of that project.
But first, knowing how important students are to Mary’s work (she exemplifies the scholar/teacher model) I’d like to invite one of her students, Ashley, to the front of the room, to give Mary the kind of introduction I’m unable to give.

Graduate Assistant Ashley Nguyen then took the stage to describe her work under Dr. Mary Galbraith: 


It was my honor to be Dr. Galbraith’s student last fall in her English 501: Literature for Children course. Professor Galbraith’s class was my first encounter with the study of children’s literature. The theme was “fantasy and a touch of the real,” which highlighted the authorial background that underlies the fantastical aspects of familiar texts such as Hans Christian Andersen’s “The Little Mermaid” and Rudyard Kipling’s The Jungle Book. She showed us how children’s literature provides a place for authors to work through childhood traumas, reimagine difficult relationships, and create alternative narratives in which the child character has unprecedented agency. This course was also my first scholarly encounter with Asian art and critique; we utilized Japanese aesthetics to analyze picture books and Hayao Miyazaki’s movies. 

Dr. Galbraith is stunningly dedicated to her scholarship. As a student just barely entering the children’s literature field, I was shocked at the complexity of her research and how much time and effort she gave it – on top of all of the courses she was teaching! Even so, she always gave her students her full attention, meeting us where we were and yet challenging us to push ourselves further, to think critically about even our most cherished childhood stories and movies. Furthermore, she taught that while academic critique is valuable, we can still appreciate texts for the affective responses they evoke. These insights affirmed my interest in studying children’s literature at the graduate level, and now I focus my research on Asian American children’s literature that reflects the lived experience of its authors and readers. I owe much of my growth as a scholar to my experience in her classroom, and it is a huge honor and privilege to introduce Dr. Mary Galbraith!  


Dr. Galbraith's lecture clearly communicated her stunning dedication to research as well as teaching. Her passionate discussion of the deictic imaginary eschewed the markers of a conventional academic lecture, more closely resembling her work in the classroom. As rigorous as she was clear and convivial, Dr. Galbraith began by explaining that deixis precedes language while language allows people to create transportable or translatable deixis.

In the deictic imaginary, Dr. Galbraith reminded, a storyteller invents and the listener (or reader) collaborates in that invention. She explains this concept further: “It is important to note, fiction is not untrue at all, since fictional narration is a creation, not a statement. Only statements can have truth or untruth.” Dr. Galbaith emphasizes that fictional language creates imaginary presence. When we read, we create these stories, and often children are much better at making an imaginary world than adults are. Dr. Galbraith feels that “imagination is, in my mind, the most precious thing the human race has made”. She praised readers for the ability to mentally envision entire worlds, following an author’s “very long conversational turn that ends whenever you decide to stop reading.” 


Come Away From the Water, Shirley by John Burningham

Dr. Galbraith used an image from Come Away From the Water, Shirley to emphasize the bifurcation between adults focused on settling on the beach and sipping their coffee, and the child who views the ocean with limitless possibility. She noted that the child is constantly forced to repress her curiosity. Dr. Galbraith went on to describe poetic narrative theory and quoted that “a fictive reality ‘is’ only by virtue of its being narrated” (Hamburger 136). 


Dr. Galbraith had prepared her 1989 dissertation abstract to share with us, but was unable to due to time constraints. She explained that much of what she had written about then was relevant to what she is doing now. She looks forward to meeting up with the “twenty other people in the world who are really focused on [deixis]” at an international conference in the coming year.


According to Dr. Galbraith, mimesis is the flip of deixis. She gestured to a chair, indicating that while an author captures presence in words, the reader imagines by turning words into presence. Deixis is the author’s performance of presence in words, and mimesis is the reader’s following of “the outstretched finger” through imagination. 

Dr. Galbraith explored The Little Match Girl by Hans Christian Andersen. Andersen creates a compelling and heart-wrenching story of this “Little Match Girl” who after suffering from abuse by her father is sent out into the cold world with nothing but the clothes on her back and a few matches. Set in the time of many children dying, the young girl’s experience outweighs the narrator’s comments on the text. Dr. Galbraith emphatically takes the side of children in stories such as this. She notes that the only other person with any real personality is the boy who steals the girl’s slippers. 

Illustration from Little Match Girl by Hans Christian Andersen

Andersen’s book is vital for background in a study of children’s literature, as he is considered the first author actually writing for children and representing the voices of children. Dr. Galbraith argues that “The Little Match Girl” is not didactically aimed towards children, but rather condemns adults, who in the tale do nothing to help the dying girl.

The event concluded with a Q&A session during which students asked about the pedagogical repercussions of this topic, about further resources, and how to better assist students with learning disabilities.


Dr. Phillip Serrato and Dr. Joseph Thomas pose with Dr. Galbraith.

The NCSCL is grateful to all who helped make this wonderful event possible. We especially thank Dr. Mary Galbraith! For an audio recording of the full talk with images and presentation slides, please see the link below:

-(SS) and (AN)

Tuesday, November 5, 2019

Invitation to PAMLA Conference 11/14-11/17



Hello Children’s Literature Scholars!

We’re having a semester packed with such exciting events. We would like to invite all of you to the PAMLA conference (Pacific Ancient and Modern Language Association) NEXT WEEKEND NOVEMBER 14-17. We are so excited to see all of the talented scholars.

It is FREE to ALL SDSU students - graduate and undergraduate - can attend for free, so make sure to bring SDSU IDs.

The conference will be held at the Wyndham San Diego Bayside. Here
is the address & phone number:

1355 North Harbor Drive
San Diego, California 92101
619-232-3861

The conference schedule can be found here:

We are especially excited to see Joseph Thomas, SDSU Professor of English and Comparative Literature and (The Amazing) Director of the National Center for the Study of Children's Literature. He will be in two events. 

The first is a discussion of the Lion and the Unicorn Children's Poetry Award that he co-founded back in 2005. Here are the details for the panel:

Friday, November 15.
3:20 PM - 4:50 PM
6.17: The Lion and the Unicorn Award for Excellence in North American
Poetry (Special Event)
Location: Pacific A

His second event is a poetry reading. He will be reading his own poetry alongside poet, musician, and scholar Michael Heyman:

Saturday, November 16
3:30 - 4:40 PM
Location: East Coast
11.07: Children's Poetry Today: A Creative Writing Reading Featuring
Joseph Thomas and Michael Heyman (Special Event)

We look forward to seeing you there!

-SS and AN


Sunday, May 5, 2019

A Few Words for June Cummins




On Friday May 3, the SDSU English department came together to celebrate the life of June Cummins. Although I never had the pleasure of meeting June, her fellow friends and colleagues painted a picture of June as a clever, quick witted woman with infectious laughter and more than enough love for everyone.

June came to be known by many things: Michelle Martin lovingly refers to June as her “Conference Wife”, Michael Borgstrom thinks of her affectionately as “Junelah”, and Yetta Howard felt honored to call her a trusted confidant. Although she may go by different names, everyone thinks of June as a beloved friend who will be dearly missed.

Joseph Thomas captured June’s vibrancy in his piece “A Few Words for June”, which can be found below, and Michael Joseph portrayed her strong will and passion for justice in describing her letters raising awareness of the use of the swastika in a children’s alphabet book.

We laughed together as Mary Garcia reminisced over her discussions with June about what to have for dinner, and tears were brought to our eyes as Lissa Paul illustrated June’s passion for family and friends: June taught at San Diego State by day and would fly home to have dinner with her family and help her kids with homework back in Chicago.

Thank you to everyone who came to honor June Cummins’ life, and we thank those honoring June from afar. She has left a lasting imprint on our community at SDSU, and on many of our hearts as well.

Our Director and June's dear friend, Joseph Thomas, wrote this piece to honor June. We thank him for sharing such touching words on their friendship with us. We reproduce it below:

A Few Words for June Cummins 

My name is Joseph Thomas, and I’m a professor here in the Department of English and Comparative Literature. I’m also the director of the National Center for the Study of Children’s Literature. June was instrumental in my joining the SDSU faculty, and were she not such a dear friend, and had she not so convincingly advocated for me, I doubt I’d be here today. Today. It’s just so wrong that she’s not here too, today, that we’re not still teaching together, working together, supporting one another as the spring semester wraps up. And 2007, the year I joined SDSU’s faculty seems so very recent. As does the year 2000, when we first met in Roanoke, VA, at an academic conference. So recent, yet also so long ago. It’s difficult to remember what it was like before I knew June; it’s like we were always friends. She should still be here. Today. Instead of this. Or at least she should be in the air heading back to Chicago for the weekend. But here we are. Today. And today we honor June Cummins. Remember her. 

June completed her MA back in 1986. Her PhD. in 1998. Her first publication was “Romancing the Plot: The Real Beast of Disney's Beauty and the Beast,” which was published in 1995. And she was presenting at national and international conferences even earlier. As a result of her early and prolific start as a scholar, June decided, even after she married, to continue to publish under the name June Cummins, and it is under that name that her professional and academic work is remembered, and it is by that name that many of her students and colleagues know her. So today, we honor June Cummins, our dear friend, our dear colleague. And today would be impossible without the really very hard – and too often thankless – work of Kim Navarro. You didn’t know June, but I can guarantee that she would have adored you. You’re a delight to work with, and your labor on behalf of today’s event, on behalf of June; your kind, thoughtful way of doing things, of getting things done – it just means the world to me. So thank you, Kim. And Michael Borgstrom. You’ve been so generous with your time; you’ve put so much emotional labor into today’s event; and you’ve been such a steadfast and wise friend for so long, but especially throughout June’s illness and, crucially – indispensably – after her passing: Words fail me. It’s difficult to overstate just how really, very hard Michael worked on making today happen. I know June would be grateful. And I know I am. When today honors June, when it summons her memory, when it moves you, June’s friends and family – inherited or invented – when it’s as special and unique and as affecting as I hope it will be, credit Michael. When it’s lacking, when it fails – when it’s rough and tiresome: blame me. 

Now. A Few Words for June Cummins. 

It’s harder than it looks, kids, writing this kind of thing. And the darkest irony is the simple fact that June was the person I’d turn to for help when writing this kind of thing. She was so good at knowing what was tasteful, what was right. In 2017, I wrote an essay honoring Alida Allison for our department newsletter. She had just retired. It began, “It’s difficult writing these things about retired friends.” And it is. But I had no idea, when I was writing, that, by 2019, just a month or so ago, Alida would be dead. I found out that she was terminally ill, in fact, when I wrote her about today’s event. Alida was among those who first welcomed June to SDSU as a colleague and, eventually, a friend. I wanted Alida to speak today—she was wise as she was good, and I knew she could help us all put June’s life in perspective, help us figure our loss. Alida couldn’t speak when I contacted her, or speaking was very difficult. So she had to decline, but she still hoped to attend, virtually if not physically. But now she speaks only in her absence. Her wisdom unavailable. 

When I was a young man, introduction to literature classes often spoke of The Grand Themes of Literature—generally characterized as “universal” themes. We’ve largely put that stuff behind us. But one of those themes still haunts: mutability. And if we eschew Universal Themes and embrace the contingent, set aside Grand Narratives for the micro, replace the Global for the local, well, that’s fine. But that’s also mutability. Even this building, Scripps Cottage, speaks loudly of mutability. Scripps Cottage is one of SDSU’s eight original structures. Together with our campus’s original quad and the five other buildings who owe their existence to the Works Progress Administration, the Cottage is part of a federally designated historic district. In 1963, this building served as the reception area for President John F. Kennedy, who had come to SDSU to deliver the commencement address and receive an honorary doctorate. It wasn’t here then. It was over there, near the Faculty-Staff Club, up the hill, where it was constructed in 1931. Ellen Browning Scripps ponied up most of the cash, the building built through monies she contributed to the local YWCA. Originally, it was a women’s center, serving as the headquarters for the Associated Women Students. In 1968 the Cottage was moved here to make way for the Love Library, the big Brutalist monstrosity that dominates the center of campus. The koi pond behind you and the groovy hills and trees, they were added in 1972, the year I was born. Alida was a student here in the 60s, floating here and there throughout the 70s, until she returned to study creative writing in our English department in the 1980s. She saw many of those changes. She knew this building. And she’s here now, if only embodied in language and, for some of us, in the stuff of memory. Permanence. Mutability. Binaries that deconstruct as readily as any other. 

I know June would appreciate being honored in this space—especially given the fact that this structure once served as a safe space for women in a world that was and too often still is unsafe. A darker kind of permanence. Some things don’t change, I suppose. Or they are too slow in changing. Today’s event adds to this building’s history. Its legacy. And for those of us who call this campus home, June’s memory will now animate this place, a kind of happy haunting that summons joy, that brightens the dark. Mutability. 

June haunts those of us who loved her. And if she will now haunt this place, by virtue of today’s event and the lingering associations today’s event will engender, she haunts other spaces as readily, even spaces she never touched. While I drove home the other afternoon in my little 2006 GTI, the White Stripes were playing. June loved the Stripes. Loved Jack White. And in my little white car—a car June never saw or sat in—her spirit manifested. Suddenly I was in another car, one June knew well, a beat-up 2004 Mini Cooper. A kind of time travel, a time trap. 

Day turned to night; the 8 turned to 4th and University. I was no longer alone and heading home, and, instead, I was on the road from Nunu’s to someplace else in that little green Cooper. June, Katie, and I listened to “Instinct Blues”: 

The flies get it. 
And the frogs get it. 
And all them big jungle cats get it. 
And I bet your little dog gets it. 
Yeah, I want you to get with it. 

I turned and saw June pressed into the back seat (Katie drove; I rode shotgun). June’s head reclined; her eyes closed; she smiled as the music played too loud. June was in her town, rambling about from joint to joint in a dirty little car – and she was digging it, she was home – or in one of her homes – but this was the home in which she once rambled about from joint to joint as a girl, as a teenager – time stacked on time stacked on time – where she still lived now (then) as a grown woman – but still stayed in her parents’ pad, once hers, still worried about staying out too late. A kind of magic took place on those late nights, magic that pressed forward into the present (I was driving home, then, on the 8, as I, now, stand before you, when transported back to that intersection in which June sat, reclined, eyes closed, in a car now gone), and that magic, then, inflected June’s long, busy days on campus. She’s still alive, a professor, a mentor, a scholar. Here – then – she was a girl, an adolescent, a college student, a professor – a mentor and friend. Time bended and warped; June was unstuck in time, as was I; she hung with a gang of ne’er-do-wells in a beat-up car, listening to music, putting off her homework – there’ll be time for that tomorrow. But tomorrow would bring her to campus, where she’d hang with college students whom she’d inspire and who would, in turn, animate her with their youthful vigor. She was a professional, a mentor, a star in her field (a kind of mantra, this); a professor, a teacher, an academic advisor, a senator, even. She is a key member of the San Diego Junior Theater’s executive board, a group she performed with as a girl. June was famous for her poor sense of direction.She’d call me for directions – once while lost in Balboa Park (I was on campus, flummoxed – for how could I help her get her bearings, miles away, in a place where she’d spent years as a child, a teen, and an adult?) – but of course she’d get disoriented. I was disoriented, even as I headed west on the 8. It’s daytime. It’s night. It’s 2008. It’s 2019. The city was in constant flux. Is in constant flux. We’re here. We’re over by the Faculty Club. The Love Library hasn’t yet been built. John F. Kennedy delivers the commencement address, receives an honorary doctorate. It’s 1963. It’s 1972. Spatially and temporally, San Diego spins eastward on the flesh of a globe turning on its axis, that globe, too, in prograde motion about our star, also spinning, taking with it its system of our sister planets, as it moves through darkness around our galaxy’s hub, that hub, too, whipping through the universe, dancing with its galactic neighbors in a celestial cluster: when and where and even who – a child, a teen, a seasoned scholar – all a vertiginous mess of selves and refigured relativities Professor Einstein couldn’t untangle. 

The art of losing isn’t hard to master; 
so many things seem filled with the intent 
to be lost that their loss is no disaster. 

The other day, Michael Borgstrom said to a graduate student (I paraphrase), “There are personal reasons I study early American Literature. I wasn’t alive when it was written, and I had to wrestle with why my interests lay there, why this literature is still important. And in answering, I can communicate to my readers why it might be important to them.” He then turned to me, adding, “There must be a reason Joseph studies children’s literature – he’s not a child anymore.” (He said it sweetly.) As he spoke those words I felt you there, June, a ghostly presence. You’re often there, in those moments, as you so often were there. Your absence a presence so massive it bends time and space, summons you from the past where you still live. You haunt the halls. 

Lose something every day. Accept the fluster
of lost door keys, the hour badly spent. 
The art of losing isn’t hard to master. 

June was there, that moment, just out of phase. I could almost hear her whisper hoarsely, “Me too.” I was hit hard, for an instant, because I could almost hear what June would add to Michael’s words. But that almost evaporated before it materialized. To imagine what June would say, what she might have said is impossible (or impossible to do accurately). For June was always unpredictable. Her insights by nature as surprising as they were provocative. That’s what we’ve lost: her uniquely Juneish way of putting things, whether in writing or in conversation. And not just her way of putting things, but the things she put. Always a joyful surprise. Still, I wondered for days after that brief haunting. Thought about June’s scholarly interests, how they, too, were deeply personal. How the place she worked, the place where she made her professional life – where she, as Lissa will suggest, made her life work, made work of her life - fairly hummed with childhood and adolescence. And I thought about the queer significance of the fact that when June wasn’t here in San Diego or with her husband and children in Chicago, she as often as not was in New York City, where she was born, the place of her childhood. Her adult life – mother, wife, matriarch – an island in Chicago bracketed by lives on either coast. Native New Yorker, native SoCaler, mentoring her young students and junior colleagues in the rich loam of her childhood. And from that fertile soil grew a career. Students budded from that career and matured into colleagues. And alongside those students, who owe so much to June’s patient counsel, grew a body of scholarly writing whose impact and influence is still being felt as it will continue being felt long after all of us in this room have followed June into death. Her legacy is in that work as much as it is in her family. Few have made so much in so little time. 

Then practice losing farther, losing faster: 
places, and names, and where it was you meant 
to travel. None of these will bring disaster. 

Cruising in the back seat of a Mini Cooper and listening to rock and roll, or hanging with me while I stole a smoke in the garage near Arts and Letters – well after the No Smoking ban had become the law of the land – or handing me a wad of bills so I could pay for drinks after sunset on the sabbath – but don’t tell, she’d smile – an adolescent act of rebellion in the face of her serious and adult desire to honor her heritage (she rests in Jerusalem, after all).

Her smile. The way she’d move her hands. Cross and uncross her skirted legs. So true and joyful. Even her anger was alive, sparking like an angry cat. "A cat's rage is beautiful, burning with a pure cat flame, all its hair standing up and crackling blue sparks, eyes blazing and sputtering.” 

I lost my mother’s watch. And look! my last, or 
next-to-last, of three loved houses went. 
The art of losing isn’t hard to master. 

We had a semi-standing ritual, Katie, June, and I. We’d venture out into the city and try a new restaurant. Each week or so we’d give one a try. “It’s no New York,” June would joke about San Diego’s food scene. “It’s no Los Angeles,” Katie’d joke back. 

Katie and I don’t try out new restaurants anymore. Or not too much. I hadn’t put it together until writing these very sentences, but that change is doubtlessly a kind of grieving. 

June and I would also have coffee together in Hillcrest before heading into campus. Usually Thursday mornings, but also other days when we could make it work. And she’d give me a ride to school after. For years we’d meet at Bread n Cie, when I lived on that side of Hillcrest. Then at Filter when I moved east of the 163. These coffees were regular things up until her illness took her away from us, took her back to Chicago. 

I lost two cities, lovely ones. And, vaster, 
some realms I owned, two rivers, a continent.
I miss them, but it wasn’t a disaster. 

Old habits die hard. So we began using Skype and Facetime to meet every week or so. A fortnight wouldn’t pass without me dialing her up. Talking with her. Dishing oncolleagues, spreading gossip, telling tales out of school. Katie and I saw her in the flesh one final time over spring break – just before she was honored with the mentoring award by the membership of the Children’s Literature Association. I’ll always cherish that final visit. But we carried on virtually between then and the last, dark weeks when her cursed disease made her impossible to reach. By the time she was forced to use a computer to speak for her, her side of the conversation dwindled. But not her smile. Her eyes. Lively and mischievous as ever. I’d curse and tell dirty jokes and delight her with my coarseness. 

—Even losing you (the joking voice, a gesture
I love) I shan’t have lied. It’s evident 
the art of losing’s not too hard to master 
though it may look like (Write it!) like disaster. 

June was – she is – it’s too much. Her memory a weight beyond weights. Her memory light as light. She’s still here, I want to say. Illuminating this space. Her smile. Her eyes. Her laser wit. If yesterday stands somewhere as real as now, as bright as the sun, whose rays reach us eight minutes and twenty seconds after they burst from its photosphere, our world lit by the recent past as the night sky is flecked by a more ancient time, then perhaps June still illuminates us, still warms our lives, even as her own body lies still, like some long dead and massive star. Or perhaps she’s just gone. And we, lost in darkness, carry on as best we can. With only the memory of light to guide us. I don’t know. But I want to believe her light still shines. And when the darkness comes – and, man, it’s black when it does – the memory of her warmth still warms. And if that warmth is a fiction, it’s the best kind. And I’ll take it. Because it’s all I got.


-SS

Tuesday, June 19, 2018

Pilot Podcast Interview ft. Dr. Krystal Howard and NCSCL Director Dr. Joseph T. Thomas Jr.

Hey Everyone!

We here at the NCSCL have enjoyed interviewing all of the fantastic guest speakers that have visited this last academic year. In an effort to keep innovation going, we decided to do something a little different in our interview with Dr. Krystal Howard and made the NCSCL Podcast! Our first episode is the recorded interview between our director Dr. Joseph T. Thomas Jr. and guest Dr. Krystal Howard and following her talk on the pedagogical impact of verse novels.

Being that this is the pilot, there is still a lot that we want to work on and improve in the future. Please comment and let us know what your thoughts on this type of project are--what works, what can be improved, what you would like to see in the future, if you would like more of this type of content--so we can keep growing as a center.

Here is the link for the Podcast (and to our SoundCloud account if you want to follow us there). Below is the embedded version. We hope you enjoy!


Highlights from Dr. Krystal Howard's Lecture:

Back in February, Dr. Krystal Howard graced the NCSCL and SDSU by giving a talk on verse novels and their pedagogical impact. Unfortunately, due to a busy semester, it is only now getting published. Nonetheless, please enjoy the highlights from the talk! There is also a special test-run/pilot podcast interview with Dr. Howard and our very own Professor Thomas following soon!


Dr. Krystal Howard graced SDSU students and faculty on February 27th with a lecture discussing her current research interests. Titled “Form as Political Resistance,” her talk looked at verse novels for children and young readers that focus on the education of the young poet--specifically Jacqueline Woodson’s Brown Girl Dreaming and Kwame Alexander’s Booked, both of which “advocate for the value of stylistic imitation through the depiction of children who write influence or erasure poems.” She discussed how these novels “highlight model authors who emphasize racial tensions” and that “the influence of erasure poems within these novels reflects socio-cultural concerns and follows the long-standing tradition in children’s literature of using texts as pedagogical tools that model behavior, and, specifically in this case, writing behavior.”
Before beginning, she explained that she got into this area of focus by reading the verse novels Autobiography of Red by Anne Carson and Out of the Dusk by Karen Hesse in an undergrad creative writing poetry class and became interested in “the form of the book.” This interest lasted with her through her MFA, Master’s, and Ph.D. programs, where, in the latter, she focused on verse novels for young readers.
            Underway with her lecture, Dr. Howard stated that Brown Girl Dreaming and Booked “focus on the artist coming of age” and that “each of these texts advocates for the value of stylistic imitation through the depiction of children who write influence or erasure poems.” Defined by an audience member, erasure poetry is “taking someone else’s text and whiting out/blacking out some of the words in order to say things that combine into your own work.”
Both these texts also “engage directly with the relationship between an artist’s creation and an artist’s environment” which “leads to emotional maturation for the characters within the text, while serving as evidence that learning to write poetry can be accessible to young readers situated outside of the text.” She also noted how both Brown Girl Dreaming and Booked “highlight model authors who emphasize racial tension,” with Brown Girl Dreaming looking at life growing up during the Civil Rights era and the influence of Langston Hughes on the young writer and Booked showing a contemporary young author erasing parts of Huckleberry Finn. As such, “the influence of erasure poems within these verse novels reflects socio-cultural concerns and follows the long-standing tradition in children’s literature of using texts as pedagogical tools that model behavior, and, specifically in this case, writing behavior.”
Dr. Howard emphasized that “the inclusion of fragments of the protagonist’s writing within the pages of the narrative underscores an emphasis on formal experimentation, collage, and the politics of form.” She defines collage--loosely--as “the layering and linking together of miscellany within a single work,” but, according to scholars such as Rona Cran and Rachael Fairbrother, collage in literary texts “moves beyond the assemblage of fragments, bringing ideas into conversation with one another, encouraging a sense of defamiliarization in the reader or viewer in order to fix attention on uneasy realities in contemporary culture, and, ultimately, emerging as a powerful site for political resistance.” Collage in the two focus texts, then, serves to “give voice to the difficulties experienced by the protagonists and to explore the issues of both confession and crisis.”
She focused specifically on the power of collage as a form of subversion and art, arguing that “in contemporary children’s and young adult literature, collage is used in order to unsettle the traditional artist coming of age narrative, and to make visible the political and social forces that help shape the writer’s developmental process” before moving on to discuss how “the verse novel is uniquely situated to address pain and healing because its form draws attention to itself as a created artifact.” An example of this is “the lyric’s emphasis on emotion, as well as poetry’s general use of space on the page, [that] invites the reader to linger over language, breaks in line and stanza in between poems,” which, considering that Woodson’s and Alexander’s verse novels contain poems within them written by young protagonists, “calls on the reader to hold space in the narrative and slow their pace further in order to consider the writing of the characters separately.”
She elaborated on what constitutes a verse novel, speaking of them as “a popular hybrid genre that engages with multiple genres, including poetry, prose, and drama” that “focuses on the emotional event and shows the reaction before and afterwards,” and is “characterized by hybrid construction.” She clarifies further that her definition of verse novels is …a series of poems linked by a narrative thread” that involve fragmentation and white-space to make the reader pause to contemplate the “gaps created by a collage of line, language, poem, scene, and para-text” which “creates an intimacy between the reader and the speaker of the poem.” The importance of this is that, “by weaving together narrative and the confessional voice, the verse novel provides the structural space necessary for reader contemplation and becomes a mode in which young readers can actively participate in the making of meaning by putting together the fragments of someone else’s life and then parlaying those resulting insights into a deeper understanding of their own experience.”
Continuing, she moved on to discuss verse novels that focus on the growth of the young writer, and how they “are unique because they present the child writer learning aspects of craft through influence, both by revering and parodying various source texts.” She quotes Tom Hunley in how poets gain their individual voice by imitation of other poets and Harold Bloom’s argument about how “‘poetic history is held indistinguishable from poetic influence, and an individual becomes a poet when she first discovers or is discovered by the dialectic of influence, first discovers poetry as being both external and internal self.’” She adds to this Dr. Joseph T. Thomas Jr.’s ideas of how child poets are “influenced through reading official school poetry, the dominate mode of poetry in schools, the kind of poetry written by adults and taught to children in the classroom” and that “‘certainly there are children who strive to emulate the adult poets they encounter, but more common are those who specialize in the sometimes bawdy playground poetry. These child poets reveal that children have a poetic tradition all of their own. A carnivalesque tradition that signifies young adult culture.’” All of this, according to Dr. Howard, is apparent in Woodson’s and Alexander’s texts. She states “While Woodson relies on poets typically associated with official school poetry, with whom her child poet speaker forms an artistic connection, Alexander draws on the childhood tradition of found poetry in order to emphasize play and humor as well as his character’s general distaste for his educational environment as a catalyst for his protagonist’s poetic tact.”
Concluding her talk, Dr. Howard expressed that Woodson’s and Alexander’s verse novels “draw connections between the education of the poet and elementary, secondary, and post-secondary institutions, linking pedagogy in the classroom and narratives directed at young readers” while also noting that “the act of inserting a creative protagonist’s own poems into a narrative is inherently pedagogical as it models for young readers how a poet might begin his or her own writing practices” serves as a powerful rhetorical move on the behalf of the author. Additionally, their verse novels are groundbreaking due to the fact “they draw on various traditions in order to illuminate contemporary issues surrounding racism in artistic expression” as well as “put forward influence, imitation, and writing response as key developmental practices” with Woodson’s protagonist “employ[ing] a method of influence that utilizes source texts by imitating structure, line, and style and Alexander’s by “use[ing] the erasure poem as a form of play and subversion in the educational setting.” These practices instilled, therefore, are an imperative aspect in the development of the young writer, states Dr. Howard,  and they “provide a map for, and a window through which, young readers can see themselves becoming poets through sustained close-reading of model poets, and a crafting of response poems that are inspired by the works of other writers that they read.”
After the talk, Dr. Howard answered a myriad of questions from faculty and students alike, and each left feeling they had learned something important about the nature of verse novels, whether that be in their construction or application. We at the NCSCL and the faculty of the English and Comparative Literature Department are grateful for Dr. Howard’s visit and look forward to seeing more of her research in the future.
For more info on that, check out Dr. Howard’s website and the next NCSCL blog for a follow up podcast conversation between her and our very own NCSCL Director Dr. Joseph Thomas Jr.!