PS I admit that I cast my vote for Dinshaw's Getting Medieval -- partly because it seems timely to reappraise the book, partly because I've been worried about how Getting Medieval has been largely absent from much recent medieval studies theorizing of subjects this book helped launch to prominence.
I will come out of the closet and admit that I was re-reading Dinshaw in there. Since Howie revisits it [albeit briefly] in "Claustrophilia," and because I am also *very* much interested in re-visiting Anna's book and also in reading for the first time Giffney and Hird's "Queering the Nonhuman," would like to start by going back to Dinshaw and working my way forward. So yes, I admit some things, too. [Though I'm also likely to post on the Giffney/Hird book, regardless, as soon as I can get my hands on it.]
I've love to read Valerie Allen and Giffney/Herd (and return to Kłosowska and Howie), but I voted for Dinshaw, as I'd like to read it all the way through, and also because it's a book that our readership probably already owns or that they can pick up cheaply.
And I'll make it a quartet of cobloggers for Dinshaw -- I brought it back to NC with me just in case, and it's a book I've been meaning to read cover to cover and haven't had the chance.
It wasn't the Tiny Shriner who did the rigging, but you did figure out our scam: we hide our oligarchical substructure beneath a thin veneer of pseudodemocracy.
PS I admit that I cast my vote for Dinshaw's Getting Medieval -- partly because it seems timely to reappraise the book, partly because I've been worried about how Getting Medieval has been largely absent from much recent medieval studies theorizing of subjects this book helped launch to prominence.
ReplyDeleteI will come out of the closet and admit that I was re-reading Dinshaw in there. Since Howie revisits it [albeit briefly] in "Claustrophilia," and because I am also *very* much interested in re-visiting Anna's book and also in reading for the first time Giffney and Hird's "Queering the Nonhuman," would like to start by going back to Dinshaw and working my way forward. So yes, I admit some things, too. [Though I'm also likely to post on the Giffney/Hird book, regardless, as soon as I can get my hands on it.]
ReplyDeleteI've love to read Valerie Allen and Giffney/Herd (and return to Kłosowska and Howie), but I voted for Dinshaw, as I'd like to read it all the way through, and also because it's a book that our readership probably already owns or that they can pick up cheaply.
ReplyDeleteAnd I'll make it a quartet of cobloggers for Dinshaw -- I brought it back to NC with me just in case, and it's a book I've been meaning to read cover to cover and haven't had the chance.
ReplyDeleteWow. This is all very interesting. I actually, as completely enamored as you all know I am with that work, cast a vote otherwise.
ReplyDeleteA gold star for the one who can guess correctly which one!
Dan, was it perchance The Tiny Shriner's Tiny Book of Scatological Verse? No? If not, then I'll guess Anna's book.
ReplyDeleteI find it amusing that the four of you have publicised your votes ahead of the final tally.
ReplyDeletePersonally, I voted for Dinshaw as well - I've wanted to read her book for some time now.
It would be interesting to ask ITM readers/voters if your comments on the poll unintentionally skewed the results.
Unless, of course, the Tiny Shriner rigged the election in favour of Dinshaw and you four were just valiantly attempting to 'de-rig' it?
It wasn't the Tiny Shriner who did the rigging, but you did figure out our scam: we hide our oligarchical substructure beneath a thin veneer of pseudodemocracy.
ReplyDelete