Month: November 2016
Mourning Ring, Private Collection
I’m very excited that our panel, ‘Materialising Love and Loss: Objects and Identity in Eighteenth and Nineteenth Century Britain’, has been accepted for the 2017 International Society for Cultural History conference Senses, Emotions and the Affective Turn: Recent Perspectives and New Challenges in Cultural History. The panel, organised by Dr Sally Holloway, features papers from myself, Dr Kate Smith, Professor Joanne Begiato, and Dr Holloway. My abstract for the conference is included below, and will form the basis for one of the new chapters of my book.
Lost Objects & Loss Objects: Intersections of Absence and Presence in Eighteenth-Century Material Culture
Freya Gowrley (University of Edinburgh)
This paper explores the complex relationship between absence and presence in our understanding of eighteenth-century material culture. Specifically, it attempts to unpack the correlation between lost material objects whose very absence evoked feelings of longing and grief; associational objects which recalled a lost family member, friend, or lover, through their contrasting continued presence; and finally, the development of a commercial material culture that explicitly engaged with, and was used to express, bereavement. Utilising a number of case studies, the paper will examine a variety of material objects and domestic spaces, including ceramics, mourning jewellery, grottoes, silverware, furniture, and textiles, in order to better understand how emotions became enmeshed with the material culture of this period. In so doing, the paper will attempt to write a theory of material loss, in which absence and presence, materiality and immateriality, were intricately related in contemporaries’ understanding of material objects.
In this final section of my three-part series looking at life immediately following the PhD, I want to discuss research. Not revising your thesis for publication (covered in post one), but starting a new, postdoctoral research project (or a few of them). Some may find the suggestion to conduct new research controversial, and would instead advise sticking to revising the thesis for publication. This is certainly a valid position to take, but not one that would have worked for me. Working on new research has been amongst the most important my post-PhD endeavours, affirming my love of research, ensuring that I had a viable second project when applying for jobs and postdocs, and providing much needed distance from the PhD. When not teaching (i.e. when the entirety of my spare time is focused on working on my monograph) I dedicate at least one day a week to my postdoctoral research project (an exploration of the relationship between assemblage and identity between 1780 and 1914). A central part in developing this project has been applying for fellowships, as discussed below.
There’s an old adage that success breeds success. While cliche, in terms of the academic job market, it’s certainly true that short-term fellowships at well respected research institutions will make you a more competitive candidate. I spent a good part of December and January of 2015-16 crafting applications for such fellowships, and received a travel grant to visit Yale University’s Lewis Walpole Library, a Visiting Scholar Award at Yale Center for British Art, and a Short-Term Research Fellowship at the Winterthur Museum, Garden and Library. Though a lengthy and often disappointing process (I think I applied for around 15 fellowships in total), revising and refining your research proposal for each of the applications is a great way of developing your ideas for your second major research project. As many note, hiring departments aren’t as interested in what you have done, but what you will do, that is how your dissertation translates into a REFable published work, and that you have an dynamic and engaging idea for a second research project, which will similarly garner publications and funding. As many fellowships require you to work closely with the host institution’s collections, the application process allows you to compile a list of sources to consult during your project, thereby allowing you to develop a fairly specific picture of what your project will look like even at an early stage in its gestation. Furthermore, receiving a fellowship for your project, demonstrates both its viability under peer review, and more importantly, the fact that your work is fundable, something of immense importance to any hiring committee concerned with choosing a candidate who will continue to attract funding once in the job.
My final piece of advice is to track what you do. When you’re managing several projects and teaching concurrently, days, weeks, and months can slip by without any real sense of accomplishment, although this is often an erroneous perception. I like to keep a monthly list of my ‘achievements’ to demonstrate to myself that whilst I have been busy, I’ve also been productive. This is also useful at a broader scale – when I ask myself what have I done in the year since submission, I can list the following: successfully defended my PhD thesis, taught three courses & contributed to the Sutton Trust Summer School, organised a bimonthly research seminar series, ran a panel at AAH, given four conference papers, had two job interviews, received four travel grants and two research fellowships, submitted several book reviews and an article for review, became a peer reviewer for a journal, conducted archival research for my new research project, and just yesterday, I submitted my book proposal (minus sample chapters) to a publisher for feedback. And I still feel disappointed not to be further ahead. I list these achievements not to boast, but to show that the period ‘between’ is a busy, stressful, and productive one, when you’re expected to balance many divergent demands. I’m not sure there’s any way around this, but talking more about the realities of being at this stage, and strategies to deal with this difficult time period, can only be a good thing.