Antigua as Kincaid describes it for her readers is through the dual eyes of a white tourist from either North America or the United States. Kincaid often has critics calling her “angry.” I don’t read her as angry, or not unjustifiably so. What you“see” as a tourist, she begins A Small Place, already setting the divide for what a tourist (you are likely from the United States or Europe) and looking for sunshine and surf.
Kincaid, Jamaica. 1988. A Small Place. New York: Farrar, Straus, Giroux
Jamaica Kincaid was born in Antigua in 1949. Her writings are autobiographical. Her focus on Antigua, the colonial history, the (eco)tourism industry as continuing extraction of humans and natural resources are very much about “place” as much as they are about being “out of place.”
fancy non-academic press
“It’s a good thing that you brought your own books with you, for you couldn’t just go to the library and borrow some. Antigua used to have a splendid library, but in The Earthquake; we Antiguans, for I am one, have a great sense of things, and the more meaningful the thing, the more meaningless we make it) the library building was damaged. This was in 1974, and soon after that a sign was placed on the front of the building saying, THIS BUILDING WAS DAMAGED IN THE EARTHQUAKE OF 1974. REPAIRS ARE PENDING.
After tracing the history of Western academic publishing, the authors argue for new ways of disseminating academic research, including mediums that are dynamic and collaborative. This type of dissemination would place more focus on the process and open endedness of academic findings and publishing.
Tracing the historical beginnings of academic publishing, the authors are able to clearly argue for a change in academic publishing and research dissemination. We’ve moved beyond a print era of publishing and instead of trying to force old styles of print media onto the virtual platforms, the authors argue we should use these platforms to rethink the publishing process, making it more dynamic and collaborative.
“Publishing preprints, postprints, or even the peer-review process allows the tracking of the development of a final version of a scholarly article” “Its impact is measured by counting the amount of citations to it, references which result at article level … it remains unclear as to whether the article is referenced as a citation within the introduction, a reference to similar ‘Material and Methods,’ or whether the cited article is being disputed in the discussion” The production process is not visible to the reader … currently, final versions of scholarly publications
In terms of experimental and installation ethnography, this text encourages a dynamic approach to research dissemination. Thinking in these terms, then, how could our installation be constantly changing? How much of the process are we willing to reveal publicly? With their conversation on social networking systems, these authors seem to prioritize conversation with different groups of people. This could help us think of different iterations of the same project. Who’s our audience? Do we have multiple audiences? How could they be in conversation with each other?
