The program is available at
http://iippe.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Final-Programme-3-July-2013.pdf
.
Many conference papers are available http://iippe.org/wp/?page_id=113
I disagree with Jurriaan's expectation leading to his decision not to go.
I did go and learned quite a bit, both at some of the sessions I
attended, as well as in discussions out of sessions. As just one
example, a Polish feminist presented a detailed report of how bad it is
today in Poland generally and for women specifically, focusing on Lodz.
Yet, the great repressive character of the regime is hidden. It was on
the final day and she talked some 45 minutes (time allocated depended
upon number of speakers who were scheduled and who showed up).
Furthermore, I received helpful reactions to my own paper "Materialized
Composition of Capital and its Stability in the United States:
Implications for Studying Capital Accumulation" (to appear sometime in
RRPE). I also had 45 minutes.
Of course, there were sessions I did not find helpful, but that does not
detract from my overall support.
Paul Zarembka
==== */Research in Political Economy/
<http://www.emeraldinsight.com/books.htm?issn=0161-7230>* (since 1977) |
Editor's *webpage <http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/%7Ezarembka>*
/*Contradictions: Finance, Greed, and Labor Unequally Paid*/ (2013)
/*Revitalizing Marxist Theory for Today's Capitalism*/ (2011), with R. Desai
/*The National Question and the Question of Crisis*/ (2010)
/*The Hidden History of 9-11
<http://catalog.sevenstories.com/products/hidden-history-of-911>*/ (2nd
ed., Seven Stories Press)
On 7/9/2013 3:00 PM, [email protected] wrote:
Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2013 15:20:34 +0200
From: "Jurriaan Bendien"<[email protected]>
Subject: [Pen-l] IIPPE conference 2013 in The Hague
To:<[email protected]>
Message-ID:<[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
...
I had the option of going to the three-day IIPPE conference of scholars, but
although some papers looked very interesting and worthwhile, I have decided
not to go. The reason is that each day consists of four two-hour sessions in
which there are usually four papers per session, with each academic having,
say, twenty minutes to present a paper, and then perhaps 10 minutes for
discussion. I suppose this "pressure cooker" format of the conference means
that a wide range of papers can be presented, that many academics can claim
credit for presenting a conference paper, etc. but basically it is not
really possible to digest and discuss so many papers in such a short time,
and it is hardly comfortable to do so. I was pretty tired already after one
day, plus a pub session, plus a long talk in the one-hour train journey back
to Amsterdam, and after another three days I think I'd be knackered. Another
aspect was that a number of presentations which I would have liked to attend
were being presented at the same time.
What I realized was, that conferencing has been turned into a reified
commodity, delivered assembly-line style with an emphasis on visuals. You
might as well show a prepared video of the talks, and discuss the video a
bit afterwards. It was really unnecessary to have the speakers there, since
they were merely an appendage of their powerpoint slides - except for
answering queries, but you could set up a helpline for that.
J.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
