Monthly Archives: January 2011

Professional development and product placement

I have been teaching as an adjunct at The Community College of Baltimore County (CCBC) since I completed my Masters at The Catholic University of America (CUA) two years ago.  As such, I am not automatically issued business cards and this does not help me network in academia, among high schools or in the realm of public history (although, I recently learned that I can request them from CCBC’s printing office).  Utilizing LinkedIn, I plum through old contacts and try to keep up with groups and other contacts.  On Twitter, I share articles, updates and blogs that are relevant to the people and organizations I want to reach.  I attend academic conferences, visit historical sites, museums and research libraries and try to make contacts, regardless of whether or not I want to work there.

A good business card is a handy thing.  If nothing else, it tells the potential contact what I take seriously.  I don’t actually want a CCBC business card, because I don’t want to be limited to that institution and its job requirements.  So, through my buddy Tony Veloz, budding photographer extraordinaire, I was introduced to Moo.com and its nifty approach to printing customized business cards.  I uploaded as many pictures as I wanted from my personal collection (based on the number of cards I was printing) and submitted my details for the other side.  The result is a wonderfully personalized business card that always generates a response from the recipients and a brief conversation that reassures me they will remember me if I contact them later.

I uploaded photos from my travels and visits covering everything from the Walters Gallery’s Mesopotamian exhibit to Roman/Greek Ephesus in Turkey, from Parliament and Big Ben photographed from the Thames to the Benedictine monastery Montserrat, from Fort McHenry to the Library of Congress.  As a historian, I have can tailor my connection to the audience based on the era or venue that best fits the impression I want to make.  At the conference on Washington D.C. history, I attended a workshop entitled, “African-American Activism in DC”, and handed out business cards with photos from my visit to the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History, featuring the sit-in lunch counter from the Woolworth’s and the exhibit featuring Harlem’s Apollo Theater.  It made more sense than handing out the card with the monastery from Barcelona (which I gave to Mayke De Jong!) or the Roman road in Ephesus.  Speaking to someone in public history warrants an American site, while a medievalist will be more interested in the medieval manuscript with the monkeys at the bottom playing “Ring-around-the Rosy.”

At some point, I would love to add some “action shots” from an archaeological dig or a teaching gig.  It offers huge flexibility and creativity for someone seeking the next big step in my career!

Just some thoughts for folks who might make use of it!!

Advertisements

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Researching at the Library of Congress

(A snow day post…)

A bird's eye view of Capitol Hill and the Library of Congress

If you don’t do research, you should find yourself a project just so you have an excuse to visit the Library of Congress (LOC).  If you have never visited, you should–it is very cool and entertaining, more accessible than many of the Smithsonian museums and better located for other amenities, plus you can spend a half-day or a full-day there and not feel like you have left most of it unseen.  (I posted about the LOC earlier for folks who want to visit:  “The Library of Congress”.)

As great as it is to take the tour and play with the “The Passport to Knowledge” at each of the exhibits, the experience researching at the LOC is awesome!  While the facility exists first and foremost to benefit Congress–think about that for a moment and see if it doesn’t give you a flicker of hope for our country’s future–it is also intended to benefit the country as a vast receptacle of knowledge that will contribute to the greater good for America’s citizens.  So, take advantage!  This is a primer on doing research at the LOC and quite frankly will only scratch the surface because there is so much within its facilities.

The beautiful Thomas Jefferson building (LOC)

Your first stop should probably be the the LOC’s website, where you can get the lay of the land and IM with a librarian to help plan your visit.  Your next stop should be the James Madison building.  Here you get your library card–it typically takes a few minutes.  The building is at the top of the street from the Capitol South Metro station on the Orange and Blue line.  (Union Station is only a few blocks away and is on the Red line.  Transferring takes the most time on Metro, so if you are already on the Red line just go to Union Station.)  The library card station is one floor below the main entrance and both the security guards and the help desk just inside the main entrance can guide you.

The John Adams building (LOC)

There is security because these are federal buildings.  Don’t bring blades–even scissors, although some guards will ignore them I wouldn’t risk it–and travel light.  Put those items that run afoul of metal detectors in your bag or coat so you can quickly run it through the x-ray machines (while this will speed your entrance, it does not necessarily help you with slower tourists who may be in line in front of you–fortunately most of them will be at the Jefferson building).  Your next step is to determine which reading room you need.  The folks who get you your card will give you a quick orientation.  For some projects you have to go to a specific reading room because the materials do not leave that room.  If time is of the essence than you will want to go to the correct room to get your materials quickly.  If you are using a variety of materials, such as books and journals, you have a little more time, or brought some materials to work on with you, go to the Jefferson’s Main Reading Room.  This is also where preparation is so important, because you can pre-request materials online and have them waiting for you in the Main Reading Room or a specific reading room.

A map of the Library of Congress facilities on Capitol Hill (more exist in Maryland!)

Let’s say you do this and are going to the Main Reading Room, you will never work in such a beautiful and, in my opinion, optimal setting.  So, enter at the Madison building, get your card and walk through the tunnels to the Jefferson building so you do not have to do the security drill again and you bypass the tourists–also allows you to avoid the bizarre DC weather.  Once you get to the Jefferson building (follow the signs–it is not quite as obvious as it might be), go to the coat check–this is mandatory!  Here, you will hand over your bags and coats.  My advice is that you wear a layer or two–I typically find that I get cold after sitting there for a while.  Travelling light is important, too, because you will carry everything in by hand or in provided clear plastic bags–which I love and constantly reused at my campus library!  This includes your laptop and its accessories, pencils (pens are not allowed in some reading rooms!!) and notebooks!  Go find a spot to sit and note the seat number.  Then submit your book requests with your seat number at the desk or pick up the resources that are waiting for you.  Assuming you find what you need, but don’t finish with all of your materials you have the option of holding the books for a week and retrieving them from a room off the Main Reading Room.  Remember you can’t take them with you!

The Jefferson's Main Reading room (LOC)

Use your time wisely and be focused about what you want to do when you are there.  I liked having two projects to work on, because  I could switch my focus if I was hitting a block or getting burned out, but I have also been guilty of over-stimulating myself and not making the best use of my time.  While we are talking about the actual practice of researching let me throw in a quick note about note-taking: Be methodical!  Put your bibliographical information at the top of page (be it in Word or your notebook) and write down the page numbers for each note.  This is a good habit to get into–especially if you have previously been stacking and hoarding library books in your room all semester long.  This will make your research process much more useful to you two years later after you’ve completed that project and realize you need something from that research which you did not include in your paper.  You can’t own all the books you need, but you can take good and useful notes, which may be almost as useful.  (The key is being able to do it quickly, which is something I still struggle at . .  maybe from lack of practice while a student!)  Finally, if you are stuck ask for help.  The librarians know there business and if you are in a specific reading room they really know their stuff.  I was amazed at how they could help me even if they were not experts in my field.  They work for you and work out solutions.  (A shot out to librarians everywhere!)

Pulling an all-dayer is possible, of course, but you need to plan carefully.  For food, you can get “off campus” if you need a break and walk a couple blocks down Pennsylvania Avenue (use the researcher’s entrances and exits on the back side of Jefferson–right next to the coat check), but be aware that the area can get a bit crowded and busy if Congress is in session and the weather is nice.  Otherwise pack your lunch and check it in with bag and coat.  There are places to eat and even purchase food in the LOC–so, again preparation–know the location closest to where you are researching.

This should get you started.  The LOC has most books published in this country, many published abroad, journals, newspapers, photos, audio and video archives.  It is a great place to visit and research.  It is worth developing a project just so you can take advantage of the facility–consider it your duty as an American citizen!

Leave a comment

Filed under Experiences, Experiencing History - Project Based Learning, Historian's Journal

Great and legendary scholar passes away…

Robert Markus, who has died of cancer at the age of 86, was among the finest historians of his generation.

 

He was innovative and he changed the field.  The contributions of Robert Markus are required reading in the field and will always be good reading.

Follow the link for his obituary in The Guardianhttp://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/jan/09/robert-markus-obituary

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Reflections on the American Historical Association Annual Meeting, 2

I loves sports!  I am a huge football and ice hockey fan!!  So, I was thrilled to attend the following workshop in preparation for my Sports in America special topics history class at The Community College of Baltimore County.

The Hynes Convention Center where the AHA 2011 conference was held (and where an exceptionally irritating fire alarm interrupted the session I am describing in this post)!

Cold War Sport in Global Context

Winning the Cold War in East Asia: Sport and Regionalism, Sandra Collins, California Sate University at Chico

Home and Away: East Germany and the 1972 Olympics in the Age of Ostpolitik, Christopher Young, University of Cambridge

The Soviet-Canadian Rivalry and a Japanese Battleground: Canadian Hockey Professionals Meet the Soviets, 1970-77, John A. Soares, Jr., University of Notre Dame

This was a fantastic workshop based on the premise that sports during the Cold War were not merely symbolic but deliberate tools in diplomacy, control and, as Soares described it, clearly identifiable victories and losses.  Collins evaluated the IOC’s political maneuvering in Asia and the clear absence of its supposed political neutrality.  Young looked at the GDR and its involvement in the 1972 Olympic Games (although I confess one of the most interesting features was the poll of GDR youth in evaluating national vs German success in the Games).  Soares presented (through fire alarms, believe it or not . . . poor Bobby Hall . . . being disrespected in Boston!) on the intentional use of ice hockey by the Candians in the Cold War diplomacy and international competition.

Collins (author of the book, The Missing Olympics) discussed the IOC’s lack of neutrality in Asia during the 1960s, banning certain countries from participation.  This prompted the founding of the Games of the Newly Emerging Forces (GNEFO) out of Indonesia.  These games were aimed at those countries in Asia and Central/South America who were blacklisted by the IOC precisely for political reasons.  Whereas the Olympic Games were heading to Japan in 1964, GNEFO was being held in defiance in 1962–the IOC banned any country that participated in the ’62 GNEFO from the ’64 Japanese games.  South Korea withdrew from GNEFO and Japan, in seeming defiance, sent a B-squad.  (It was suggested that this might have been a determined effort to distance Japan from its internationally enforced relationship with Taiwan.)  Clearly, this active involvement in international politics on the part of the IOC.  (Inspired by this talk I found this 1963 Sports Illustrated article covering GNEFO.)

Young is a scholar after my own heart (although much more accomplished and knowledgeable) who is actually a medievalist, doing sports history for the joy of it!  For the purposes of my brief post, I choose to focus on two points from his larger presentation–one from his paper and one from the comments and questions afterwards.  One of the most interesting aspects from this discussion was his summary of the opinion polls that the GDR took from their youth–the category of youth who were not on board with the government were categorized as those “not yet disposed” to support the government!  In these polls, a hypothetical handball tournament was suggested among the USSR, East Germany, West Germany and Denmark and the youth were asked which teams they would support.  Whereas East Germany won by a landslide and the USSR came in second, the West came in at a very close third.  Polls also revealed a great deal of animosity for the individual GDR athletes, despite the universal support for the GDR teams.  Citizens of the GDR reveled in the success of West Germany during the Olympics, as well.  Young concluded that the support for athletic representation was not necessarily support for the regime.  In response to a the commentator and a query from the audience, Young also discussed gender during the Olympics and the preparation for those Olympics.  The GDR recognized the rise of female participation in the Olympics and deliberately sought to dominate in this arena.  Of course, this policy led to the tainted metals won by the steroid-juiced athletes in 1972.

During the Cold War, the competition to demonstrate the superiority of these opposed ways of life and governance spawned many “cultural exchanges” that were intended to out-do and create dissension among the various populations.  Soares demonstrates the deliberate use of ice hockey by the Canadians to fight these cultural wars.  Ice hockey, in particular, is uniquely appropriate for this discussion, Soares explained, because all the relevant powers played it, it was a team sport and the diplomats considered it one of their weapons.  There was deliberate discussion about utilizing ice hockey instead of ballets and symphonies to win the war for the people’s sympathies.  The Canadians boycotted the Olympics for many years, offended by the farcical claim of communist and socialist countries that they were sending teams of amateurs in compliance with the rules.  Ice hockey was also an important link between Canada and Japan in their attempts to build diplomatic ties independently of the U.S.

Of course, this is a brief summary of larger discussions and contexts, but it shows not just the legitimacy of considering sports in the Cold War, but the actual necessity of it!

1 Comment

Filed under Historian's Journal, Lectures

Reflections on the American Historical Association Annual Meeting, 1

This past week historians descended on Boston thicker than a Nor’easter snow storm!  This is an enormous conference, not least because it is open to as wide a collection as possible of the fields and subfields under the history umbrella.  In hundreds of workshops, innovative ideas are presented, discussed, have sex with each other and create new little ideas that will grow in the work and research of both the presenters and the audience.  These are great moments for those of us in the field to develop professionally and grow in the field.

I have a couple of thoughts that I would like to share this week from the conference and which I will spread over a couple of posts.

Rhetorics of Reform and Medieval Religion

The Semiotics of Pious Reform and Insurgent Historiographies in Early Islam, Thomas N. Sizgorich, University of California at Irvine

A Conversation Across Centuries: Reforming the Secular Clergy in Western Christendom, 800-1200,  Maureen C. Miller, University of California at Berkeley

Reform, and Ever Reforming: From “Movements” to Conflicts, from Persons to Institutions, from the Twelfth Century to the Fifteenth, John H. Van Engen, University of Notre Dame

Comment: Mayke de Jong, Universitiet Utrecht

I have been interested in various reform movements in the Medieval period, spending the most time with the Carolingians and the 11th century.  In most cases, I was concerned with the intended reforms and not their relative success, in other words: trying to grasp what was intended in these reforms on the part of specific reformers though not necessarily how successful any actually were.  The reason for this is obvious–we have the documentation for the reformers so we can make that effort to get inside their heads, but determining their successful or unsuccessful implementation is not as well-documented.  But, this is where the challenge is and historians are remiss to ignore it.  This was, to a large degree, the substance of the talks.  The word “reform” has started to lose its currency in much the same way that the word “feudalism” has.

Whereas Miller turned to material culture to try to trace attempts at clerical reforms and actually ascertain to what degree the reforms were implemented, Van Engen discussed the difficulty in the idea of “reform” for an institution that should be continually devoted to self-reflection and, thus ideally, self-correction.  The point is this: to really return a sense of substance to the word, it would behoove us to stop considering reform in terms of waves of movements, and instead focus on the changes that occurred (or didn’t) as a result of calls to reform.  De Jong congratulated the presenters on this precise point when recalling the work of Robert Markus (recently deceased and remembered) who suggested that the real work for scholars would be to look at the spaces and places that changed and shifted in the Church’s history.  (This is what he did so well in The End of Ancient Christianity.)

Without this revision to our approach, the word “reform” seems to require definition and explanation every time it is used.  It also means that we need to leave behind the purely intellectual history of most previous reform discussions and try to tease out the actual effects of these propositions on the ground.

This is what Miller did in her presentation regarding the priestly vestments and their evolution through the period of the 800-1200 reform movements, seeking evidence of these alterations in the material culture–a challenging task given the limited number of sample artifacts.  Her project is clearly attempting to rectify not only the problems with our discussions about reforms but also the means by which we gain insight to movement on the ground.  In addition to the vestments, she made use of the regional liturgical legislation as a method for inter-textual reading against the legislation that was coming out of Rome which faced unique challenges that were not experienced in most regional churches.

Van Engen compared the resistance to these movements among the clergy as being frequently resisted among large segments of the targeted population to a hypothetical reform in academia wherein professors would lose their offices and instead congregate together as a return to academia’s purer roots!  Given that, it seems worthwhile to identify actual successes or setback in such programs.

1 Comment

Filed under Historian's Journal, Lectures

Books on my nightstand!

As I get ready for the upcoming semester, lesson planning and what not, I have a big stack of books, journals and magazine articles I am trying to work through.  I thought I would share with a brief review of each of the books.

In prep for Western Civilization I

In prep for my Egyptians/Hittites I am reading How to read: The Egyptian Book of the Dead, by Barry Kemp.

I am looking at the historiography of Alexander for my Greek unit and skimming J. B. Bury’s lectures on The Ancient Greek Historians–he was brilliant, but is no longer cutting edge!  He is a classic among classicists and a good read, plus the work is brief, but a LOT of scholarship has been written since then (1909!!!).  He is a nice starting point and I am reading him to clarify some things, but the Alexander stuff is much more recent.

In prep for my sports history class

While I would have preferred to call this class Sports and Society, it has actually been titled Sports in America–I can still work with that!

I am starting with the gladiators, ancient Olympics and Mayan ball games so I can introduce historical method (especially since most of the books written about sports history are written by journalists).  So far, to this end, I am working on a scholarly collection, The Mesoamerican Ballgame, edited by Vernon L. Scarborough and David R. Wilcox and Popul Vuh, The Definitive Edition of the Mayan Book of the Dawn of Life and the Glories of Gods and Kings.

I have a unit on soccer in this class that is intended to introduce many of the issues we will cover in a case study sort of style.  This has the advantage of introducing areas of interest, but also of critiquing the methods by which these books are written–again, there are no historians among the authors.  I have already knocked some of these off my list, but am currently reading The Boys from Little Mexico, by Steve Wilson.  It describes the challenges for immigrants in this country and the notion that sport is a way out and up–except, perhaps, in the case of soccer.

I am also devoting a class to the media and have been reading up on ESPN.  I am currently reading ESPN, The Uncensored History, by Michael Freeman.  Much of this touches on gender and sports–in this case from the media standpoint and sexual harassment.  But, the idea is bigger and I also want to talk about sports media and the creation or deconstruction of celebrity.

I am also preparing for my DVDs that I will include.  My favorite one to this point, despite my ignorance of baseball, is The Tenth Inning by Ken Burns.  I would really like to watch his whole series on baseball, but it isn’t in the cards right now.

If you have any suggestions, PLEASE share!!


Leave a comment

Filed under Experiencing History - Project Based Learning, Historian's Journal