Poor introducer, whose name I missed, had to read two statements in English at the beginning (with misspeaking of “dark age” for “digital”) before Malte Rehbein’s intro. 150+ participants, 18 countries (Europe, U.S., Asia).
Edward Vanhoutte gave a talk in two halves, bridged by actual chocolates to enhance the second-half experience. SYTYCD effect, MasterChef effect: influence, popularity, usw. —time for a “digital editing effect” to inspire popular uptake? Generate thus enough revenue? Small chance because audience not there or doesn’t understand what d. e. is about.
Two MA theses. www.sintbrandaan.ugeent.be/edition.php has no editorial work per se—scanned and amalgamated, with historical essay but no philological info; Ajax-enhanced access to transcription, facsimile. ctb.kantl.be/edities/GS/ uses DALF TEI extension and enables complex search taking advantage of complex tagging. Didn’t design system by self but system requires that tagging. Student #1 passed, #2 failed, and it’s our fault, for not making what we do transparent enough to our colleagues.
Don’t hide the encoding behind pretty interfaces.
SYTYCD and MasterChef don’t claim that dancing or cooking are easy; people flock nonetheless to learn more and sign up for classes. TEI by Example tries to offer “classes” in similar wise. Be less social; offer training.
Bridge goes here (with passing out of chocolate).
Like innovative young chefs, young editors want to distinguish themselves, but they succeed only when informed by the past as well.
Robinson, Shillingsburg, Bowers/practical edition.
Social edition now: its sweet promise, sour reality of sustainability, bitter something, salty something. It’s built upon achievements of New Historicism and sociology of text—proposal to remodel scholarly edition with use of social media, beyond academic audience. See Siemens et alia, forthcoming (apparatus variorum: documentation of variation, account of emendation, control data for reconstruction, research database—saying that editor hides there misunderstands what app. crit. is for). How social is it really? Maximal edition expects an expert reader; minimal edition, a cultural product, expects a common reader (“for fun”). (Ebooks have tiny share of market in Flanders.) Social edition is extension of maximal edition, with minimal built in: asocial.
Perhaps first social edition was D. G. Rossetti Archive (McCann et al.), 1993-2008. One problem is that over time it goes from research tool to research object. (Then the bit above in parenthetical above near Siemens—sorry; comment if you can disambiguate! and Vanhoutte will post talk.) Apparatus is the foundation of scholarly debate; it must be available for common reference, else we don’t know what we’re talking about.
End: fifth taste, umami, which enhances other tastes. (Unclear on how social edition ties in here, and looking forward to reading his talk—ETA: here.)