CHArt

(Return to **Polythemus** page)

=Computers and the History of Art=

1. Introduction, [by John Lindsay - inserted by someone else - don't know how many sections or paras will need this]
I have been arguing that much of search science, knowledge organisation, subject approaches to information, has played almost no attention to the arts and humanities in general. [JL adds 12 August that he hasn't thought yet whether or where anything approaching a scholarly apparatus should go in these matters, for example, Broughton and Slavic, in J.Doc. He remembers though that this is combined with the use of twitter as hashtag indexing so that would become simply #broughtonhumanties. ]

(I'm also not sure one should use I so much, or at all? (JL adds 12 Aug, but all the others are either pretentious or deceptive)

It seems appropriate that we should consider the organisation called CHArt [], for it involves computers, history, history of art, art, and is thus a matter of Polythemes. It might lend itself to considering matters of wiki for we might also deal with the sorts of knowledges which become legitimate. It published a journal, or at least I think it does, in which I found a paper by Karen Cham which raised the matter of division or divide, and transgression in the particular context of the arts and technology. This struck me as worth pursuing, so I started in wordpress - amphitaxis - leverhulmetrust - cham or http://amphitaxis.wordpress.com/about/cham/ to make some connections between divisions, or divides, first in the matter of pairs, and what might be regarded as transgressors.

But CHArting the matter of wiki, which also means folksomonies and tagclouds, and the sources of what might be called KIDMM, for whch I use JSTOR as a knew, and seek to make knewbots seems to me to be worth attention.

JL adds, 11 August, that he has found out about the association for history and computing which could change the chart title for he is doing the whole of the arts and humanities; but there is likely to be argument about the thingness of history, and anyhow, chart got there first. Historical research methods for the 21st century he is going to get and read, and then put something somewhere. This is not the place to add e-very-thing, for the linearity of the discourse will be lost.

This is particularly in the context of the call of the Leverhulme Trust for a project on beauty: http://www.leverhulme.ac.uk/grants_awards/grants/research_programmes/call2010

Though the diaspora would be as interesting for KIDMM matters.

Were we now to regard this page as a wiki on computers and the history of art, from the perspective of KIDMM, rather than for example the perspective of digital methods, (hmmm - John is now becoming confused when he googles on digital methods, there seems to have been a lot of change, so he will have to pause this until he has time to check.)

Art starts us off with two matters we have considered already, that of genre, or forms the chief regulator, and media. To this we add subject. Art in the history of art and CHArt must be all arts, though the CHArt people appear to engage in the visual arts? Literature is an art, history is an art, and so too are philosophy, politics. Is this statement merely a matter of opinion, or does it need to have some sort of justice? Wikipediatrolls exert tedium so one leaves. Wordpress means one may write as one wishes. I'm making the presumption here that one is dealing with matters of professional obligation.

I'm also now presuming that a page this long means that people trying to comment will have difficulty making clear the point on which they are commenting. I'd like to add numbers, but that will make changing edits tedious. I'd like to embed deeper structures, but that might make later editing tedious. Instead I am going to open headlined sections which deal with discrete matters; those may be moved easily, or editied easily.

2. Faceted classification
This seems to me the core concept to KIDMM which the librarian brings. There has been much discussion since the start of the web about the collaboration of the computer and the library, but we need to perhaps restate the basics.

Rather than do that at the general, itself a KIDMM matter, I'm going to deal with the particular, or specific, and also show how this makes a Polythemus.


 * 2.1 V8 Pure Bliss**

{and a meta method matter, I had a paragraph heading already which has disappeared, and don't know what has happened to it}

If you approach the Holden Stalinist Fascist Phallic thing landed in Bloomsbury which is known as Senate House, it consists mainly of a library. Within the building also the Institute of Historical Research, of Classical Studies. Round about the Bloomsbury suburb are others, the Warburg Institute, down in Aldwych, the Courthauld, up a bit, the British Museum, further up on the Euston Road, the British Library. Some of these are combined in the urls, which google used to ask whether you meant girls. That begat metafind. Now we have 360search, and librarything. Librarything gets us to findinalibrary.

All this means a knew way of doing research in the arts and humanities.

The systems used by some of these allow you to click on classmark which gets you to the posting list of the shelfmarks.

The Senate House library uses Bliss see glossary], about which many of its victims might know almost nothing, unlike Dewey which many people might have learned at school? The Institute of Classical Studies uses its own scheme. The Warburg scheme I outlined in detail in the Blunt Dialectic. {metapoint, my own history and activities I'm putting into Wordpress as either infopolecon or amphitaxis, as those are not wikispaces or KIDMM matters.} Some of the others I haven't decoded yet.

There is a leaflet produced as Senate House Library Information Group explaining it says, how the classification works. There are also leaflets on what are called subjects. We need to bookmark this concept subject as it is going to come back time after time, and will be part of our matter.

By subject, genre, form, we enter the world of the chief regulator, but also the world of autonomy and institution. Personal knowledge and social knowledge and how they intermediate.

Now we need to deal with a 'nother matter of method. Having already descended to a lower case to discuss the matter, we need to descent lower, or broader, to make a knew case in order to show the matter. This case is Polyphemus.

Now we have a knew metamethod matter. The Polyphemus case will involve a lot more than V8. But there is no other useful way of discussion V8 than by cases. We might begin to built visualisations.

What we now also want to show, in addition to how tools such as ulrls may be used, the way we might use tools such as twitter and wikispaces to built knewbots. The hashtag enters. #Polythemus is a case. #wikispaces is a case. #KIDMM is a case. So too is #PRADSA which we deal with in social activism, and #CHArt, which we deal with here, #ulrls, which I have started, and #JSTOR which I have not yet explained. There is also a knew hashtag, #phArt, which I haven't explained yet.

Within #Polythemus, we now have #Polyphemus as a case and that gets us directly to #CHArt, and #phArt.

3. Pastoral
Now for the matter of a real case. {Notice the problem of method: we could use case within 2.1. V8, and/or we could develop case here as 3. We are going to have a location and numbering problem as this develops, and even more so if others join in.} {Nother problem on method, wikispaces is only one, this wikispaces is devoted to KIDMM so only these matters should be considered here; a real case involves all matters, so might be better done elsewhere.} But this is where CHArt is, so here we do CHArt Pastoral.

End of matter.

Pastoral has challenged category.


 * 1) AlpersPastoral. I have explained the twitterhashtag before, and in different places. Do I need to explain it again?

What is Alpers on about? That means librarything and findinalibrary, I have explained these before. Does this keep it on KIDMM track?

Those sources have classmarks and subject headings. These are metadata elements, and/ or tags. Tags, metatags and data, metadata is a glossary matter.

Shelfmarks and classmarks are and are not the same thing, as is a pressmark.

Alpers has a bibliography, which is organised in alphabetical order. This has fascinated me for a long time. The new technology make doing things with indexes and bibliographies really easy. I have demontrated this on Zoho a long time ago.

Alpers doesn't actually answer his question.

So we need to build something knew.

I'm going to start with Pope, Alexander, #alexanderpope discourse on pastoral, #popepastoral.

{another note on method, and metamethod, adding these notes on method would be a real irrittion for a reader, and a writer, Method note: writing an essay is a different matter for writing for wikispace. The way an argument is structured, How one makes notes, thinks of ideas, combines notes into essay form}

**3.2 Kermode**
Though this might not be 3.2. See numbering matter. 1952. He has a couple of pages in an introduction with a section, The Nature of Pastoral Poetry, which is so dense in matter that I could photograph it, mark it up, then place it, and number the points as I demonstrated in Choice of Hercules; I could colour code the lines with transparent plastic postits then photograph that, and the colour coding would allow an elementary taxonomy, though I would shortly arrive at cross classification. I could type in a large number of quotes, that being very timeconsuming.

He makes the point about the use of the word kind to be the same as genre. Then that kind is natural. [Genre of course generates. The unnatural does not generate?] That art is unnatural. Oh, no it isn't. Art is an instrument of nature. These concepts I put into a twitterfeed (tweet it is called though I shan't repeat these sorts of things again); #kermodeenglishpastoral. {More method: I have experimented with taking all the tweets into a word processor which worked fine, and am now experimenting with what sorts of processing one may be able to do on that.}

{These ideas of the association of art and nature have changed over time and space, over culture, so part of the matter is how these changes are indexed over space, time, concepts, semantics.}

He makes a connection early on about the Renaissance. The Renaissance is going to be the same sort of matter as the Pastoral. Now we have a knew thing: How do we order Renaissance and Pastoral? I've generated elsewhere the concept andoid. This is an instance.

Here we might make the assumption that someone else has gone to openlibrary found some material on #kermodeenglishpastoral, gone to findinalibrary and taken a copy out; less likely, gone to Amazon and bought, even less library, pulled down off a shelf. One of the joys of having lots of books lying around, is that I can often simply go and pull them out of stacks. The introduction is open in front of you. But in the same manner as nova means both new and young, pastoral has something to do with slave.

This is a little shocking perhaps?

3.x Subject : genre
{methods note, I have raised this at the Polythemus level and now want to plunge into real detail. I am also going to have trouble with numbering paragraphs, sections, and the matter of when to open knew pages entirely, if that is the right word, and knew volumes, if that is the right word, perhaps not on wikispaces KIDMM as we are straying off someone else's topic and adding clutter.}

At the CHArt Level we began to comment on this matter. Pastoral is a case within CHArt.

Pastoral in JSTOR hits 52k results.

This is knot a good result. This is where we need disamgiguation. (OK, 52K isn't quite gig, but it is much too big.

Now JSTOR allows us to browse from a pop list of what it calls disciplines. What is the connection between a discipline and subject? Who disciplines the discipline?

We have a body of knowledge on this matter, but here is not the place to put it. That is the matter of phKO.

This is the matter of phArt.

Go to art and art history, and 2.5K hits. Notice there are only 55 journals. JSTOR is a long way from complete, and is thoroughly US in its matter. This is a more general point that we don't want endlessly to repeat.

Go to language and literature, there are more than 11K hits on 90 journals.

How much of the material under art and art history is the same matter as under language and literature?

If we take any one text on which we are working, and jot down the subjects, we are dealing with literature, certainly, the classics, certainly, art and art history already raises the CHArt matter, how much is literature an art? We have poetry. Is poetry a subject or a genre of literature? That is an or matter too. If the poetry is a song? There is much in pastoral dealing with flutes and whistles. Is this music? Missing from most of the literature literature is masque, which is something we are going to add. But that might be opera.

{At some point we are going to want to raise a generality which is about genre and subject, and method and matter, which is that generality follows particularities. Except that might not be true?}

Opera is a genre, perhaps, or a subject, perhaps, which is certainly music. Is it theatre? Tragedy, comedy, history?

Then there is politics, economics, philosophy, history in the ancient text, in the middle text and in the modern text. This begats phArt. Go back to the Kermode if losing the plot.

Remember we have V8. Pure Bliss too, above, if losing the plot.

So far, literature, classics, music (insert poetry), politics, history, philosophy, .. - is this enough for a Polythemus or do we want to aim for completeness? This gets us to wikispaces matters, for others would add their opinions. Does this then imply the author hasn't thought of it, or he isn't aiming for completeness?

He was used there. This is a gendered text. What is the gender of pastoral, and what is the subject of gender? That I am afraid, gets us back to genre.

3.z A knove pastoral
Now we run a knew test case.

P1 Daphnis P1 Strephron P2 Alexis P3 Hylas P3 Aegon P3 Thyrsis P3 Delia P4 Daphne P4 Lycidas P4 Thyrsis P5 Pollio
 * P1 Damon

M1 Lycidas

S1 Colin

Tx Delia Ty Marathus

V1 Meliboeus V1 Tityrus V2 Corydon V2 Alexis V3 Menalcas V3 Dameotas V3 Aegon V3 Damon V3 Amyntas V3 Galatea V3 Pollio V3 Palaemon V5 Menalcas V5 Mopsus V5 Amyntas V5 Daphnis V6 Silenus V6 Hylas V6 Hyacinth V6 Gallus V6 Phaethon V7 Corydon V7 Thyrsis V7 Meliboeus V8 Damon V8 Pollio V8 Alphesiboeus V8 Daphnis V9 Lycidas V9 Moeris V9 Amaryllis V9 Varus V9 Tityrus V9 Galatea V9 Daphnis V9 Menalcas V10 Gallus V10 Lycoris V10 Adonis V10 Phyllis V10 Amyntas

T1 Daphnis T1 Thyrsis T1 Goatherd T3 Tityrus T3 Amaryllis T3 Polyphemus (JL) T4 Battus T4 Corydon T5 Comatas T5 Lacon T5 Corydon T6 Daphnis T6 Damoetas T7 Amyntas T7 Lycidas T7 Aratus T7 Ageanax (Lycidas) T11 Polyphemus T11 Galatea T11 Nicias T11 Cyclops T12 Diocles T12 Ganymede T13 Hylas T13 Heracles T13 Telamon ||  ||

The first fails utterly as this machine with microsoft word opens a rtf file from textedit on a mac with nothing!

The amount of time I waste with machines.

Now the result of that test, is the tab separator from text edit didn't work here. It is amazing how difficult it is to move the most elementary structured data across worlds. And the tab key doesn't work here either.

But there is enough to get the idea perhaps, until I rework the whole thing. It worked fine putting it into Excel, except for a matter I knew about already, and I know it works in Zoho for I have done it there. It might be worth trying to export it from here into excel and see what happens, but reducing dependency on excel is part of the matter.

Bear in mind that all this is quite possibly my stupidity, rather than anything to do with the machines.

> // Conrad comments: I have started a thread on the discussion page associated with this wikipage, about transferring tabular material into Wikispaces .//

Now the need to explain.

P is **Pope**, Alexander, who you will find in wikipedia, and the number is the numbering of the pastorals, as he calls them, except for 5, which he calls Messiah. The name opposite is the occurrence of something which is both new, in that he has made a creation, and an old, in that it exists previously. These strings are sufficiently unusual that many of them make good greps. We may notice for example that he is not using names which occur in the Bible, or in Plato. Though to that we may have to return.

M is **Milton**, and so far I have only Lycidas, for I haven't checked the entire corpus yet, and unless there is a concordance, this isn't straightforward. There is a literature on Lycidas, and a huge one on Milton, and I have been using twitter for some elementary indexing.

S is **Spenser**, sometimes Spencer, who so far I have only done one. This is the same matter as Milton. 1 refers to the month of the Shepherds Calendar ( this is spelt in different ways at different times), in this case January. There is however a different matter here, to which we shall return, who is Colin? That has two meanings and a vast literature.

T now, is **Tibullus**, and this is going to be a different type of problem for it was only discovering Delia that forced me to put him in, and that matter I will come back with.

V of course is **Virgil**, or Vergil, and it has taken us an awful long time to get here, for this is the knut of the matter, the knew and the knove.

Virgil's collection of ten works on a single roll is called the Eclogues. The numbers are the Eclogue numbers. At least there isn't much dispute about that. The names are the characters who appear in the numbered eclogues.

The big T list refers to **Theocritus**. The collection of what is now considered to be his corpus is called the Idylls. The numbers are the idyll numbers as now regarded to be stable. The names are as with Virgil and Pope.

Now we have the knew matter. By putting these two columns separate, we may take column two and resort against column 1. Make sure you are doing this on a copy, for if you resort on 1, you will not return to what we have here and everything will be destroyed.

The logic I have here is that we start with **Pope**, who is recent, and who is imitating, not translating, the earlier perhaps, that though is a big matter and method issue. Then we move backwards through time, and each time there is a knew accretion for the future but we may make a safe hypothesis, that time cannot move in the other direction. Until someone proves it isn't safe.

The alternative is to start with **Theocritus**, the ur case. That of course we may not easily do except by reading. So far this group isn't too long to be unmanagable by a human, but it could become so.

Combining these strings now makes a knowbot for JSTOR, ulrls, and some others to which I might need to return.

Now we have a matter of method to consider again.

If we are considering only Virgil's second exclogue, just for example, we may have a considerable literature dealing simply with that. That however might, and now the matter becomes much more contentious, we might want to compare with other Virgil, with Theocritus, with Pope.

If we are dealing with tangible objects, pieces of paper, journal articles, books, and we want only to have one copy of each thing, then it has to go in a physical space, either a huge pile, or in some sort of order, in which case, which? or what? If we are dealing with computer records, we which will call 1) the record thing; 2) the case thing; 3) the thing thing; we will call these intangible and now have to deal with matters knew. We are also going to produce something, for example this page, which will need also a record, and all these will have to be joined together.

All of this gets us to the pastoral, and we may leave this knove.

JL adds as insert that there doesn't appear to be a comments box with this wikispaces opportunity and I can't point to the difference of this page now from when I was editing it.

JL wants to leave that comment and now return to the main thrust of the narrative.

But JL thinks he has cracked the matter of transfer so is going to try again:

Nope, it is a nightmare trying to align two columns. I'm going to abandon that for now. There is a response time problem as well, simply entering text.

Le'ts try another way


 * P1 ||  || Damon ||
 * P1 ||  || Daphnis ||
 * P1 ||  || Strephron ||
 * P2 ||  || Alexis ||
 * P3 ||  || Hylas ||
 * P3 ||  || Aegon ||
 * P3 ||  || Thyrsis ||
 * P3 ||  || Delia ||
 * P4 ||  || Daphne ||
 * P4 ||  || Lycidas ||
 * P4 ||  || Thyrsis ||
 * P5 ||  || Pollio ||
 * M1 ||  || Lycidas ||
 * S1 ||  || Colin ||
 * Tx ||  || Delia ||
 * Ty ||  || Marathus ||
 * V1 ||  || Meliboeus ||
 * V1 ||  || Tityrus ||
 * V2 ||  || Corydon ||
 * V2 ||  || Alexis ||
 * V3 ||  || Menalcas ||
 * V3 ||  || Dameotas ||
 * V3 ||  || Aegon ||
 * V3 ||  || Damon ||
 * V3 ||  || Amyntas ||
 * V3 ||  || Galatea ||
 * V3 ||  || Pollio ||
 * V3 ||  || Palaemon ||
 * V5 ||  || Menalcas ||
 * V5 ||  || Mopsus ||
 * V5 ||  || Amyntas ||
 * V5 ||  || Daphnis ||
 * V6 ||  || Silenus ||
 * V6 ||  || Hylas ||
 * V6 ||  || Hyacinth ||
 * V6 ||  || Gallus ||
 * V6 ||  || Phaethon ||
 * V7 ||  || Corydon ||
 * V7 ||  || Thyrsis ||
 * V7 ||  || Meliboeus ||
 * V8 ||  || Damon ||
 * V8 ||  || Pollio ||
 * V8 ||  || Alphesiboeus ||
 * V8 ||  || Daphnis ||
 * V9 ||  || Lycidas ||
 * V9 ||  || Moeris ||
 * V9 ||  || Amaryllis ||
 * V9 ||  || Varus ||
 * V9 ||  || Tityrus ||
 * V9 ||  || Galatea ||
 * V9 ||  || Daphnis ||
 * V9 ||  || Menalcas ||
 * V10 ||  || Gallus ||   ||
 * V10 ||  || Lycoris ||
 * V10 ||  || Adonis ||
 * V10 ||  || Phyllis ||
 * V10 ||  || Amyntas ||
 * T1 ||  || Daphnis ||
 * T1 ||  || Thyrsis ||
 * T1 ||  || Goatherd ||
 * T3 ||  || Tityrus ||
 * T3 ||  || Amaryllis ||
 * T3 ||  || Polyphemus (JL) ||
 * T4 ||  || Battus ||
 * T4 ||  || Corydon ||
 * T5 ||  || Comatas ||
 * T5 ||  || Lacon ||
 * T5 ||  || Corydon ||
 * T6 ||  || Daphnis ||
 * T6 ||  || Damoetas ||
 * T7 ||  || Amyntas ||
 * T7 ||  || Lycidas ||
 * T7 ||  || Aratus ||
 * T7 ||  || Ageanax (Lycidas) ||
 * T11 ||  || Polyphemus ||
 * T11 ||  || Galatea ||
 * T11 ||  || Nicias ||
 * T11 ||  || Cyclops ||
 * T12 ||  || Diocles ||
 * T12 ||  || Ganymede ||
 * T13 ||  || Hylas ||
 * T13 ||  || Heracles ||
 * T13 ||  || Telamon ||   ||   ||
 * ===Well, that worked, but it looks a mess!===
 * T12 ||  || Diocles ||
 * T12 ||  || Ganymede ||
 * T13 ||  || Hylas ||
 * T13 ||  || Heracles ||
 * T13 ||  || Telamon ||   ||   ||
 * ===Well, that worked, but it looks a mess!===
 * ===Well, that worked, but it looks a mess!===
 * ===Well, that worked, but it looks a mess!===
 * ===Well, that worked, but it looks a mess!===
 * ===Well, that worked, but it looks a mess!===
 * ===Well, that worked, but it looks a mess!===
 * ===Well, that worked, but it looks a mess!===
 * ===Well, that worked, but it looks a mess!===
 * ===Well, that worked, but it looks a mess!===
 * ===Well, that worked, but it looks a mess!===
 * ===Well, that worked, but it looks a mess!===
 * ===Well, that worked, but it looks a mess!===
 * ===Well, that worked, but it looks a mess!===
 * ===Well, that worked, but it looks a mess!===
 * ===Well, that worked, but it looks a mess!===
 * ===Well, that worked, but it looks a mess!===
 * ===Well, that worked, but it looks a mess!===
 * ===Well, that worked, but it looks a mess!===
 * ===Well, that worked, but it looks a mess!===
 * ===Well, that worked, but it looks a mess!===

||  ||   || P1 || Damon ||   || P1 || Daphnis ||   || P1 || Strephron ||   || P2 || Alexis ||   || P3 || Hylas ||   || P3 || Aegon ||   || P3 || Thyrsis ||   || P3 || Delia ||   || P4 || Daphne ||   || P4 || Lycidas ||   || P4 || Thyrsis ||   || P5 || Pollio ||   ||   ||   ||   || M1 || Lycidas ||   ||   ||   ||   || S1 || Colin ||   ||   ||   ||   || Tx || Delia ||   || Ty || Marathus ||   ||   ||   ||   || V1 || Meliboeus ||   || V1 || Tityrus ||   || V2 || Corydon ||   || V2 || Alexis ||   || V3 || Menalcas ||   || V3 || Dameotas ||   || V3 || Aegon ||   || V3 || Damon ||   || V3 || Amyntas ||   || V3 || Galatea ||   || V3 || Pollio ||   || V3 || Palaemon ||   || V5 || Menalcas ||   || V5 || Mopsus ||   || V5 || Amyntas ||   || V5 || Daphnis ||   || V6 || Silenus ||   || V6 || Hylas ||   || V6 || Hyacinth ||   || V6 || Gallus ||   || V6 || Phaethon ||   || V7 || Corydon ||   || V7 || Thyrsis ||   || V7 || Meliboeus ||   || V8 || Damon ||   || V8 || Pollio ||   || V8 || Alphesiboeus ||   || V8 || Daphnis ||   || V9 || Lycidas ||   || V9 || Moeris ||   || V9 || Amaryllis ||   || V9 || Varus ||   || V9 || Tityrus ||   || V9 || Galatea ||   || V9 || Daphnis ||   || V9 || Menalcas ||   || V10 || Gallus ||   || V10 || Lycoris ||   || V10 || Adonis ||   || V10 || Phyllis ||   || V10 || Amyntas ||   ||   ||   ||   || T1 || Daphnis ||   || T1 || Thyrsis ||   || T1 || Goatherd ||   || T3 || Tityrus ||   || T3 || Amaryllis ||   || T3 || Polyphemus (JL) ||   || T4 || Battus ||   || T4 || Corydon ||   || T5 || Comatas ||   || T5 || Lacon ||   || T5 || Corydon ||   || T6 || Daphnis ||   || T6 || Damoetas ||   || T7 || Amyntas ||   || T7 || Lycidas ||   || T7 || Aratus ||   || T7 || Ageanax (Lycidas) ||   || T11 || Polyphemus ||   || T11 || Galatea ||   || T11 || Nicias ||   || T11 || Cyclops ||   || T12 || Diocles ||   || T12 || Ganymede ||   || T13 || Hylas ||   || T13 || Heracles ||   || T13 || Telamon ||   ||   ||

Now another matter, do I clean this up so it is readable, or leave it with the historic track to I can see what I had to go through?
===Then another matter again. What happens if someone says, where is Bion? My reply would be non omnia possumus perhaps. But I might well want to add Bion. That means either try to insert table, or remove and put knew. We will come back to that.===

hmm, looking at it again a short while later, it hasn't worked, it is all a mess again. And it trashed some of the subsequent text. 4. Augustan.
{A matter of method again. Actually I might not want Augustan to be a matter of 4. I might want it to be contained within the pastoral, with some sort of appropriate linkage, for I can't tell how important it is going to be in its own right, and to the structure of my thinking. For remember, this isn't an essay on the pastoral, it is an investigation of how wikispaces and KIDMM matters structure thinking and reflection.}

{By putting Augustan in 4. it becomes a matter of symmetry and entaxis and parataxis with Pastoral and this might not be the case. Were I to put it within pastoral, it would be a matter of hypotaxis, which was certainly originally my intention. This is going to be a matter of genre, of subject, of fact, of reason, of argument.}

Augustan generated #mendell and then from my box of ten years ago, #griffin.

JL adds 090909 (not quite but likes the shape) that having been doing wordpress for a while with twitter and coming back to this, he has to try to remember everything he had been doing, where it had got to, and what he has to add in the meantime.

Trying to amend the table will change reality in a way which he doesn't want. he also wants to test search across wikispaces and wordpress which means good grep. Ariosto has provided a smoking renaissance idea.

{There is some more stuff to add here, but I am finding it harder and harder to remember where anything went.}

5. Arcadia
Writing on line is simply not sustainable. Will do offline and add.

Except that I find that impossible for small sections rather than very large chunks.

I have about fifty note points from yesterday's work, which now has to go into a variety of different places.

__6. Neoterics__
This is a rather strange term. It has the same matters as pastoral, Augustan, Arcadian, and we need a method for dealing with it.

We may make a general knew point here, though this is not the place to make it.

The term, label, name for a genre appears only after innovation in the genre has disappeared? The label is then used backwards onto pre-existing neo-termics (and I have just invented one, I will underline a term when I introduce into the paragraph, section a knew concept?) (But i will forget that.)

{This is in many ways a subset of 3x-z still, though I changed the numbering through a matter of method and matter.}

Jump into matter: Pastoral, Augustan, Arcadian, Neoterics, {Upper case method}; have we kept a track of these names, labels, terms?

The word, for that it what it is still, is then used to chunk and clump prior existing, and I'll use the word, knowledge, into knew containers which in the process change the content.

Let us take Virgil (not Ve) who is a neoteric, perhaps, an Augustan, certainly, perhaps, the writer of the Eclogues, though he wasn't. He appears to have written ten little things which have been published and widely discussed, called the Eclogues, roughly. The scale of the literature is vast. He is the V in the table above. The term pastoral in English is first applied to his Eclogues by n in m. This is fact, and is either discoverable or not. The Oxford English Dictionary now has a new tool which is very useful, a timeline graph of the use of a word. Pastoral had a meaning in the time we now might call Anglo Saxon. It appears again at the end of the sixteenth century. Who first used it on Virgil? This is a fact. It is a fact that Virgil did not understand or use the word pastoral. He did use the word pastor.

It is a fact, perhaps, that he alluded to Theocritus. He is the T above. Was he a neoteric, a pastoralist, an Arcadian, certainly he could not have been an Augustan. Wipes brow, thank brow for that. Who first joined in English Theocritus with Virgil in pastoral? That is a fact. Now there were a bunch of others around in the time of Theocritus, and the time of Virgil. Have they been left out of the stack? Were they doing something different? At some point we need to add that Idyll is attached to Theocritus in the manner Eclogue attached to Virgil, except perhaps not, Theocritus might actually have used the term. That might be a fact.

Idyll, Eclogue, might be genre. Joining them together might be genre. Including others in the canon, or excluding them might be genre bendre? JL adds later, that bucolic has to go here too.

All or none of this might have to do with what they might mean, and or whether someone considers them beautiful, or history, or literature, or religion, or classics. We'll note here, but probably have to return to it that the book called the Bible doesn't usually appear as pastoral, despite having lots of shepherds.

7. Alexandrian
This pops up, and perhaps isn't Greek.

But somewhere I noticed a wonderful point that the poets who might be grouped with Theocritus were all librarians at the Library of Alexandria, who entertained themselves designing taxonomies for genres, and because one document could go only in one place, there could only be a one to one mapping between genre and document. They then entertained themselves by writing genre benre (can I drop the d now) so none of the categories fitted the work. Nothing changes.

You would end up with one work per genre, on that basis, which loses the property of parataxis and entaxis while perhaps as an extreme case, preserving symmetry?

At some point I am going to have to explain genus, taxonomy, symmetry, entaxis, parataxis, hypertaxis, hypotaxis, and why I invented amphitaxis. But for the moment they serve as good grep strings for search science.

8. Hellenistic
This pops up and is perhaps sort of Greek.

If I were writing a book, I'd get all this sorted out beforehand.

This case remember dropped out of the V8 suitcase, so these terms all become good V8ers. The first form of that was Pure Bliss. We could now go to the Institute of Classical Studies, which is part of the Senate House group, or the Warburg, for deception theory.

9. Another knove
Now I want to move to the next stage of knovelty.

Insert table.


 * Gifford || Pastoral || 1999 ||
 * Marinelli || Pastoral || 1971 ||
 * Williams || Country || 1975 ||
 * Empson || Pastoral || 1935 ||
 * Alpers || Pastoral || 1982 ||
 * Loughrey || Pastoral || 1984 ||
 * Marx || Machine || 1964 ||
 * Panofsky || Meaning || 1970 ||
 * Puttenham || Poesie || 1589 ||
 * Barrell || Pastoral || 1975 ||
 * Greg || Pastoral || 1906 ||
 * Congleton || Pastoral || 1952 ||
 * Cooper || Pastoral || 1977 ||
 * Williams || Problems || 1980 ||
 * Szatek || Pastoral || 1995 ||
 * Poggioli || Oaten || 1975 ||
 * Arber || Barnfield || 1882 ||
 * Montrose || Pastoral || 1983 ||
 * Burke || Rhetoric || 1950 ||
 * Sannazaro || Arcadia || 1480 ||
 * Sannazaro || Piscatorial ||  ||
 * Nash || Sananzaro || 1966 ||
 * Virgil || Eclogues ||  ||
 * Theocritus || Idylls ||  ||
 * Sidney || Arcadia || 1590 ||
 * Spenser || Shepherds || 1579 ||
 * Barnfield || Shepherd || 1595 ||
 * Lord || Pastoral || 1931 ||
 * Tasso || Aminta || 1573 ||
 * Leach || Handel || 1980 ||
 * Leach || Vergil || 19 ||
 * Calverley || Eclogues || 1869 ||
 * Cooper || Opinions || 1711 ||
 * Pope || Pastoral || 1714 ||
 * Longus || Daphnis ||  ||
 * Politan || Orpheus || 1471 ||
 * Petrach || Bucolicum || 13 ||
 * Hopkins || Texts || 2001 ||
 * Hubbard || Pan || 1998 ||

10 Knewve
Now, 04.10.09, I have several weeks of new stuff to add, plus I am now delivering the module on electronic document management for which this is case study material.

Do I go back through the earlier stuff and add it in, or do I put it in here?

We need to remember that this is still, by and large, one person, not a team, working on it.

We also need to try to remember that some stuff has been put into discussion though it hasn't provoked very much.

And we need to bear in mind that writing narrative is a different matter from making notes.

But we have been over Sidney's Arcadia. This now opens a whole load of possibilities which partially replicate the experience we had with Milton.

Now I have a set of Milton, a set of Lycidas and a set Pastoral.

From JSTOR I have taken about forty papers, put them onto a stick, taken them onto another machine, then tried to title them from the JSTOR numbers into a folder. What I have found is that putting them into folders Milton, Lycidas, Pastoral causes all sorts of matters. Adding Spenser, then Sidney simply makes things a lot worse.

The set Sidney, which is a much worse grep than Milton, bad enough with Keynes, or Spenser, bad enough with c, is of no use at all. Sidney Arcadia is the test.

Pointers and reminders
//Conrad Taylor// adds: we might usefully maintain a list of topics and organisations possibly connected to this topic.
 * **[|CHArt – Computers and the History of Art]** group. Established 1985, and currently run from the Centre for Computing in the Humanities at King’s College, London. The principal activity is an annual conference; proceedings are published electronically. Next conference is 12–13 November, 2009, at Birkbeck College London.
 * **[|The Collections Trust]** — founded in 1977 as the Museum Documentation Association and adopted its present name quite recently (2006?). The focus is on campaigning for the public’s right to access cultural collections, and promoting best practice in their management. As MDA, published the SPECTRUM standard for Collections Information Management. Also maintains [|The Collections Link] – a Web-based collection of practical advice for looking after and documenting collections.
 * **[|The UK National Commission for UNESCO]** — UK focal point for activities in the UK related to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. One of 192 different national commissions relating to UNESCO, the UK commission was disbanded by Clare Short but revived by Hilary Benn.
 * **[|ARLIS]:** ‘The **Art Libraries Society** is the professional organisation for people involved in providing library and information services and documenting resources in the visual arts. Founded in 1969, the Society is an educational charity with over 700 members worldwide, including librarians, archivists, libraries, publishers and specialist library suppliers. Our members work in libraries and archives serving the academic, public, gallery and museum sectors.’
 * John wonders whether links to digital methods, and leverhulmetrustbeauty, see above initial para should be here?