Thursday, January 16, 2014

Call for papers: The Rhetorics of Food

Deadline: 20 January 2014
Conference
The Rhetorics of Food
KU Leuven, Belgium
26-27-28 May 2014


As the intake of food is a basic “ingredient” of human life and cultures, it is no wonder that changes in this culture can reveal changes in basic patterns of a civilization (cf. Norbert Elias in the 1930s, reedited by UCD in 2012), Lévy-Strauss 1964). Over the past twenty years the rhetorics of food have developed rapidly and widely: TV chefs and journalists develop new lifestyles; regional and exotic foods mix in “transnational” combinations. Slow and fast food compete for consumers’ daily meal decisions.  In contexts of postcolonial cultures or diaspora (like the Irish one) where a transnational identity is being developed, rejection or acceptance of food is one of the main identity markers of cultural assimilation or alienation. (cf. Karl Marx’ Man is what he eats). People also speak (or refuse to) with their bodies in breastfeeding; a substantial number of children and adolescents develop eating disorders, and the age of onset of these disorders seems to be decreasing. Table manners change, but more significantly a new ethics of food brings about a new awareness of ecological aspects of produce. That the rhetorics of food is a “hot” topic is also illustrated by the latest issue of the renowned Cultural Studies Review published by UTS (Sydney)on food cultures and amateur economies.
The topic of food clearly is situated at the intersection of various disciplines. We are therefore thrilled to be able to organize this multi- and interdisciplinary conference on the Rhetorics of Food, particularly as we have succeeded in bringing Tina Beattie (Roehampton College, UK) to the conference as the Key Note Lecturer.
This conference will look at how, both in the past and the present, people have been using the language of food to many purposes., and will bring together a number of worldwide recognized experts on the topic to the Leuven Centre for Irish Studies. We welcome papers in different areas: literature, cultural studies, theology, art (iconography/iconology), film, history (of ideas) and architecture, anthropology, political sciences, psychology, philosophy, economics.
Topics could include (but are not strictly limited to):

Psychology, philosophy of food:
- Food and identity; the ethics of food; diet and health; hygienic rules
- the rhetorics of quantity, and forms of potlatch  (cf. Montanari 1995);
- refusing food: bulimia, anorexia, allergies;
- food as a weapon / reward: poisoning / heavenly food
- positive and negative symbolism attaching to food: salt, honey, fish, bread, potato, turkey, haggis… vs taboos
- gendered kinds of food (Walker Bynum, 1998)
- fear of food (Ferrières, 2002); discourse on genetic manipulation; food scandals
- hierarchies of food (animals, plants, herbs, spices), of guests;
                Rhetorics of chosen company and space:
- selection of invitees;  forms of hospitality: monastic, regal, bourgeois, nomad, professional; xenophilia / xenophobia: stories about unexpected visitors, magic of conviviality
- rituals in kitchen & dining room: cutting bread, carving meat; Burns Night, …

Food in Literature:
- verbal and other rhetorics in pivotal positions in a novel (Molly Keane’s Bad Behaviour, Joyce’s Dubliners and in Ulysses, Woolf’s To the Lighthouse …); ritual feasts (cf Christmas) often mark a conflict (or a reconciliation)
- kitchen sink drama; poems on food (Keats, D.H. Lawrence, Harrison…);
- Lands of Cockaigne and all kinds of fabled food 
- links between eating and reading, interiorizing food or words (Apocalypse, The Name of the Rose); connections between the making of a poem and the making of food
- “Gastropoetics”: writers and cookery (from Dumas to Dahl et al); metaphors used to describe food (Jean-Paul Aron, Jean-François Revel, …)
- developments in etiquette from Middle Ages till now: in fiction (Arthurian romance) or in etiquette books

            Food in the media:
food in film, in journalism & cookery books; forms of advertisement and assessment of food (cf. Brillat-Savarin 1807, Gault & Millau 2013)

            Theology of food:
- Questions relating to food in the bible, in the Eucharist;  mediaeval “Schluckbilder”;
- the idea of food and sacrifice; health and holiness (cf. Levenstein 1996);
- images of the Maria lactans;  
- Iconography of fasts and feasts (cf. Walker Bynum 1988, 2007)

            The Esthetics of food:
- Real and metaphorical eating (cf. Saturn eating his children)
- new forms of discourse on still life, kitchen pieces (beyond Schneider, Bryson et al)
- representations of feasts and fasts: Brueghel, Botticelli, Veronese, Jordaens, Moreau,
- the language of cutlery, crockery, glass, textile at table
- food as art: consummation of the visual; (Jan Fabre 2000, Tuymans 2013)
- accompaniments: music, dance, other entertainment interacting with food

Economics of food:
- food scarcity and strategies of poverty reduction,
- agricultural development and food distribution
- climate change and effects on food production and consumption

Papers focusing on Ireland (or a comparison with Ireland) will be especially welcomed.

Confirmed plenary speaker: Tina Beattie (Roehampton College, UK)
Title: “The female breast in theology and art”

The conference is hosted by the KU Leuven, the Faculties of the Arts, Theology, Psychology and Pedagogy in cooperation with the Leuven Centre for Irish Studies (LCIS). It will take place in the newly refurbished Irish college in Leuven (the Leuven Institute for Ireland in Europe).

-Fees: 150 EUR (tenured), 80 EUR (students) which covers conference costs, social events, lunches and coffees.

Papers should not exceed 2500-3000 words (20 minutes’ delivery). Proposals for papers (250-300 words) and a short biography should be sent by e-mail to Hedwig Schwall , Hedwig.schwall@arts.kuleuven.be
You will be notified by 31st January.

More information about the conference will be posted on www.irishstudies.kuleuven.be/




Monday, December 9, 2013

Report from the SBL session on Jewish/Christian identities

We attended the SBL/AAR Annual Meeting in Baltimore, Maryland (November 23- 26, 2013). We promise a couple of reports from various sessions ranging from Jewish/Christian identities to Paul's theology in the making in the Corinthian correspondence.
The first report is on the session: 

Construction of Christian Identities Section (S23-114)
Theme: How Many Groups of Jesus Followers in the First Two Centuries?

Edmondo Lupieri, Loyola University of Chicago, Presiding
Clare Rothschild, Lewis University
“Have I not Seen Jesus Our Lord?” (1 Cor 9:1c): Failure of the Markan Eyewitnesses as Pauline Propaganda
Sandra Hübenthal, Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen
Basileia, Jesus-wise or Mark-wise?
Michael A. Daise, College of William and Mary
First-Century Jewish Identity Under Rome
Monica Selvatici, Londrina State University
Constructing Christian Identity in Luke-Acts: The Purpose of Pharisees in Lukan Theology

Claire Rothschild’s paper dealt with Mark’s gospel and Pauline letters in which she challenged the traditional opinion about the author of the gospel coming from Peter’s circles. Her hypothesis is that the gospel of Mark was written as Pauline propaganda. This means that the Markan theme of the failure of the eyewitnesses demonstrates a historical association with Paul. In her opinion the Markan gospel is the first one to validate Paul’s authority as an apostle. Despite many significant differences between the undisputed Pauline letters and the Markan gospel this hypothesis, being highly speculative, seems interesting and brings some possible openings for future research on the relationship between Mark and Paul.

Sandra Hübenthal discussed the different views on the kingdom of God presented by the characters and the narrator of the gospel of Mark. She observed, that the narrative voice proclaims Jesus as the Son of God and urges the readers to accept that belief. On the other hand the narrative character Jesus proclaims the Kingdom of God that is just at one’s fingertips and invites the followers to make an existential choice in that view. She argues that these two different views could represent the two views of the groups that were composing the second gospel. Hübenthal is convinced that there was no one single author of the second gospel we could refer to, but rather the gospel emerged as a group effort. In that view he studies the question, if the group standing behind the Gospel thought about the Kingdom of God Jesus-wisely or Mark-wisely.

Michael Daise offered a paper in which he argued that the level of diversity within Judaism of the first century would easily allow another group, namely the group of Jesus followers, to sustain one of the Jewish identities of that period. Daise enters into dialogue with Martin Goodman and his “Rome and Jerusalem: The Clash of Ancient Civilizations.” According to Goodman Jewish-Roman animosity that eventually resulted in the Jewish-Roman war was caused by intra-Jewish rather than Jewish-Roman conflicts. Daise expands on that and claims that the axe of the conflict was the material status of rich and poor. This argument serves the purpose of highlighting the intra-Jewish diversities at the time.  

The last but not least paper in the session was devoted to the analysis of the function of the Pharisees in  Luke-Acts. Monica Selvatici argues that the Pharisees in the Lukan corpus are portrayed more friendly than in the other writings of the New Testament. She points out that, e.g., in Luke the Pharisees never want to kill Jesus, but only catch him on words. In Acts the Christians of Pharisaic origin cause only one relatively little problem regarding circumcision (Acts 15:5). Selvatici concludes, that since the image of the Pharisees in the gospel was rather friendly (in comparison to, e.g., Matthew) and that Luke referred to those who converted from Pharisaic Judaism to Christianity - the Pharisees were of great theological importance for Luke.


The session dealt with various early Christian identities. I think the answer to the thematic question would simply be “many.” On the one hand, it is striking that there was actually no clear distinction between various groups within Judaism of that time, so Jesus followers were hardly distinguishable for the external observer (Daise). On the other hand, this indistinguishable group of Jesus-followers, in its very initial stage, coming from various Jewish groups (Selvatici), already was so strongly diverse regarding the views on the God’s kingdom (Hübenthal). Also, the members of the same group clashed among themselves with regard to anti-Peter and pro-Paul propaganda in Mark (Rothschild).
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...