Call for papers: Writing the Heavens. Celestial Observation in Literature, 800–1800

Call for papers, extended deadline: 30 September, 2020
Conference: "Writing the Heavens. Celestial Observation in Literature, 800–1800"
May 20-22, 2021 – Dr Karl Remeis Observatory, Bamberg (Germany)

Organizers: Aura Heydenreich, Florian Klaeger, Klaus Mecke, Dirk Vanderbeke, Jörn Wilms - ELINAS (Center for Literature and Natural Science)

Confirmed speakers: 
Raz Chen-Morris (Hebrew University, Jerusalem)
Alexander Honold (University of Basel)
Hania Siebenpfeiffer (University of Marburg)

In the Middle Ages and early modernity, celestial observation was frequently a subject for verbal rather than numerical and geometrical recording. Astronomical genres, in the hands of natural philosophers, poets, chroniclers, travellers, geographers, educators and others mediated knowledge of the heavens in textual form. Before the modern academic institutionalization of astronomy, such celestial knowledge extended from the cosmological to the meteorological, with applications and implications that touched upon a wide range of discourses, be they theological, legal, political, medical or agricultural. From Carolingian scholarly commentaries to the lyrical description of the 'cosmic garden' in Erasmus Darwin, the formal shape of these representations is intimately connected with the questions raised by astronomy, and the possible answers they might elicit. Such texts could variously function as (mimetic) models of the universe, and simultaneously offer (pragmatic) models for specific types of behaviour. In this, they were deeply enmeshed in their historical, geographical, scholarly, popular, religious, philosophical, and generic environments. For the modern scholar, these records can be difficult to decode, and the question of what they address or seek to explore is obscured by the respective generic traditions, tropics and imagery, and other discursive contexts. However, as tokens of pre- and early modern 'astroculture', they allow insight into the changing epistemic place of astronomy throughout the millennium in question. By most accounts, this millennium includes a number of distinct historical periods, and studying the transformation of astronomical knowledge and its representations over the longe durée can shed light on the integrity and utility of such chronological constructs as well as on the transformative processes, the linguistic changes, and the conceptual revaluations that inform them.

This interdisciplinary conference seeks to establish and facilitate a dialogue between literary studies, astronomy (and physics more generally), and the history of science. The convenors invite papers on medieval and early modern 'literature' of celestial observation in a broad sense, ranging from what would today be deemed 'fictional' to 'non-fictional' writings, from scholarly works to popular genres. How, we ask, are textual forms bound up with pre-modern astronomy and its institutions? What kinds of data are represented in these texts and what are the modes in which they are communicated? What interpretational problems arise when present-day disciplines like climatology, meteorology, geophysics, and astronomy, but also literary studies, try to access them, and what solutions might be offered? Which technological and interpretive tools are at our disposal to recover and make sense of astronomical data and references in pre- and early modern texts, and what insights could be gained from an interdisciplinary approach? How were verbal representations of celestial phenomena encoded and self-consciously placed vis-à-vis other systems of representation and knowledge? How were discourses on law, anthropology, aesthetics etc. entangled with astronomical observation and knowledge? How did they realize their own medial, didactic, informational, aesthetic potential? How did they reflect on the forms of knowledge they engaged (especially in terms of the epistemological purchase of 'observation' and 'imagination')? How was astronomical knowledge used to construct continuities with, or differences from, antiquity and the Judaeo-Christian or Hellenic traditions?  Which spatialized conceptions of human nature were recognizable before and immediately after the (alleged) 'Copernican disillusionment'? How did individual scholars, texts, and concepts travel between European and non-European cultures, both in space and in time, and which constructions of self and other arise in the process?

Papers of twenty minutes each are invited on topics including but not limited to:

• the historiography of medieval and early modern astronomical writing 
• the recovery of celestial 'data' in medieval and early modern texts for productive use in modern science (including climatology, meteorology, geophysics, and astronomy)
• methodological approaches to, and desiderata for, interdisciplinary work in the field
• the institutionalization of genres as 'forms of knowledge' (including textual genres such as histories, almanacs, chronicles, or broadsheets and their representational strategies)
• rhetorical strategies (including metaphors and other tropes) and their legitimizing function in the production of authoritative knowledge in poetic and other discursive contexts, such as law, anthropology, aesthetics
• the ideological functionalization of ideas of cosmic order and semanticizations of mankind's cosmic place
• links between textual and material astroculture in the period 
• transfers of knowledge and networks of knowledge, including the dissemination, reception and transformation of classical texts.

While we will be seeking external funding, we cannot commit to covering the speakers' expenses.

Please submit 200-300 word abstracts until 30 September, 2020 to klaeger@uni-bayreuth.de, vanderbeke@t-online.de, joern.wilms@sternwarte.uni-erlangen.de, aura.heydenreich@fau.de or klaus.mecke@physik.uni-erlangen.de.

A Play a Day in May

What started out as a silly joke almost a year ago became an overly dramatic reading project for the lockdown month of May. Something appealed about spending a short amount of time each day immersed in a different theatrical world. I had been enjoying discussions of the National Theatre at Home weekly broadcasts with friends, and wanted to explore the genre in more depth, even if that meant reading a script without seeing it fully staged. Crucially, I had discovered that the University subscribes to the Drama Online site, where almost all of the plays I would read could be accessed for free.

I deliberately didn’t think too long and hard about the list I put together, beyond determining some basic principles: they had to be plays I hadn’t read before; to be a mix of some classic and some more recent works; to be by a diverse range of authors; and to include no Shakespeare… A few minutes’ sleuthing around the internet threw up some interesting-sounding suggestions, to add to others that I had always been meaning to get around to reading.

To the astonishment of no-one more than myself, 31 days later, I have read 31 plays. I had to be flexible, of course: I re-ordered my original list when delivery dates for the few books I did buy were delayed; on some days I had time to read more than one play, to compensate for the days when I couldn’t read any at all. But by the end of the month, I'd made it to the end of the list, from Lucy Prebble's well-crafted analysis of experiment and experience in The Effect to Liz Loughhead's brutal updating of Medea.

Along the way, I think I learned some general lessons for our current situation. First, that in the midst of uncertainty, it can be helpful to pick an achievable, and time-limited project. Second, that a willingness to adapt to changing circumstances is required, even within a strict plan. Third, it is not a case of all or nothing, and much can be gained from encountering something in a different form when it can’t be experienced in person.

Almost every play will remain with me, in whole or in part: a remembered phrase, a character trait, a plot twist, or a stage direction. Although I had selected and listed the plays almost at random, themes and patterns seemed to constantly emerge: contrasting pairs, frustrated ambitions, intergenerational conflicts, questions of faith and fate, science and art, violence and love.

But what to recommend? Henrik Ibsen’s Hedda Gabler, for the compelling character study at its heart. Lorraine Hansberry’s A Raisin in the Sun, for its claustrophobic evocation of familial tensions and aspirations. Martin Sherman’s Bent, for tragic hope and human connection in the dark. And if you’ve only seen the TV adaptation of Phoebe Waller-Bridge’s Fleabag, then you are in for a treat.

So that was May, but what for June...?

Full list of 31 plays

(*Potentially of particular interest to Science and Literature Reading Group members!)

Date	Playwright	Play
1	Lucy Prebble	The Effect*
2	Noel Coward	Private Lives
3	Sophie Treadwell	Machinal*
4	Jessica Swale	Blue Stockings*
5	Timberlake Wertenbaker	Our Country's Good
6	Samuel Beckett	Happy Days
7	Henrik Ibsen	Hedda Gabler
8	Theresa Ikoko	Girls
9	Anton Chekhov	The Seagull
10	Yasmina Reza	'Art'
11	Lucy Kirkwood	Chimerica
12	Phoebe Waller-Bridge	Fleabag
13	Eugene O'Neill	Long Day's Journey into Night
14	Pierre de Marivaux	La dispute*
15	Pedro Calderon de la Barca	Life Is a Dream
16	Caryl Churchill	Far Away
17	Lorraine Hansberry	A Raisin in the Sun
18	August Wilson	Ma Rainey's Black Bottom
19	Athol Fugard	Sizwe Bansi is Dead
20	Janice Okoh	Three Birds
21	Martin Sherman	Bent
22	Iman Qureshi	The Funeral Director
23	John Osborne	Look Back in Anger
24	Tony Kushner	Angels in America*
25	Tim Crouch	An Oak Tree
26	A. Al-Azraki	The Takeover
27	James Graham	Sketching
28	Jean Racine	Phedra
29	Aphra Behn	The Rover
30	Federico Garcia Lorca	The House of Bernada Alba
31	Liz Lochhead	Medea