Long Road

Apparently Kevin Rudd’s wife, Therese Rein, has joined up with a the “Indigenous Literacy Project.” It’s not clear from the article in the Australian what the project does except that they aim to get books into Indigenous communities.  Their website states that:

The Indigenous Literacy Project (ILP) is a partnership between the Australian Book Industry and The Fred Hollows Foundation that raises funds to purchase and supply books and other culturally appropiate material to remote communities where The Foundation works.

I’m all for more books, sure (and I’m not sure what the other “culturally appropriate material is?). But the idea that more books = improved literacy is a bit off. Maybe they have other plans as well. Sure more books would help, but the idea of reading to your kids is still a pretty white, middle class socialization. I’m not suggesting that Indigenous parents don’t want to read to their children, but that there are other priorities in terms of social time. And on top of that, if the parents don’t read then more books won’t do a whole lot to improve literacy. The value behind this is that good parents read to their children. White folks had to be convinced of this in the 1950s and now it has become axiomatic. If there aren’t programs in place in libraries, schools, community centers, etc.–places where Indigenous parents feel comfortable being and learning themselves, then this is one more way in which Indigenous parents get perceived as lacking the necessary skills (desires?) to care for their children.

There has been a lot of discussion about “open access,” author’s rights, and publishing practices in relation to scholars in general and the AAA in particular. For a refresher check out this post at Savage Minds. I recently received two author agreements that are moving in a direction more favorable to authors. By that I mean allowing authors and publishers to agree on terms through which they will both benefit (i.e. by getting the work out there to more readers).

First, I was part of a discussion about open access and anthropology started by Chris Kelty that will be published in the August edition of Cultural Anthropology. The CA author agreement I received had a new twist in its “author’s rights” paragraph from the one I received when I published an article with them in 2006. The new agreement includes this statement:

The Author is hereby reserving the rights to use his or her article in the following ways, as long as Author acknowledges the published original in standard bibliographic citation form and does not sell it or give it away in a manner which would conflict directly with the business interests of the American Anthropological Association: 1) To use the article for educational or other scholarly purposes of Author’s own institution or company; 2) To post the article on Author’s personal or institutional website; 3) To post the article on free, discipline-specific public servers of preprints and/or postprints; and 4) to publish the article or permit it to be published by other publishers, as part of any book or anthology, of which he or she is the author or editor, subject only to his or her giving proper credit to the original publication by the American Anthropological Association, unless the anthology is drawn primarily from Cultural Anthropology.

So, it appears that I can post a CA article on my own website (or blog, presumably) as I have done here at Long Road (click under the publications tab for a look). It is not clear, from the wording, what iteration of the article I am allowed to publish? Pre-prints, post-prints, final pdf??? What counts as a “post-print” is not clearly spelled out. Now, this is somewhat mute for the upcoming article as Kelty also attached a SPARC addendum to the AAA contract we all signed that allows us (several of us contributed to the piece) that states:

4.2. Distribution. Author has the non-exclusive right to distribute copies of any version of the Article, including but not limited to the published version, by means of any web server from which members of the general public can download copies without charge, provided that Author cites the journal in which the Article has been published as the source of first publication, when applicable. “Published version” means the version of the Article distributed by Publisher to subscribers or readers of the Journal.

Now that is clear. If the AAA adopted clearer language in their own author agreement, this extra step wouldn’t be necessary. A few years ago I didn’t feel I was in any position to negotiate anything with CA–I needed a publication in a top ranked journal in my field. So even with the SPARC addendum, the question remains, will junior scholars (like myself) feel compelled to attach the addendum? Or do we police ourselves and thus give over control to CA (and AAA by extension)?

Here’s part 2.

Last year I signed a contract with the School of Advanced Research Press to publish my book Aboriginal Business: Alliances in a Remote Australian Town (forthcoming winter 2009-yeah). It was a very standard contract and I was happy with it because one of the deciding factors for me going with SAR was their willingness to seek an Australian press to publish the book in Australia in tandem with the US publication. I wanted the book to be more easily available in Australia (and thus less expensive for those purchasing the book there). SAR has worked hard at this, but still we are unclear what our options are. So as this has been unfolding (the back and forth with Australian presses and distributors) I floated an idea to the publisher about a month ago: let me publish a pdf of the final book on my blog for people to download. I argued (as others have) that this would be good for the press, good for me, and good for the circulation of the book (which is what we both want). To their credit, SAR decided to allow this alternative, companion publishing. The letter I received states my author rights clearly:

This letter confirms that you have SAR Press’s permission to post the complete, final pdf of your book, Aboriginal Business: Alliances in a Remote Australian Town, on your blog, after the book has been published and made available for sale. To protect SAR Press’s investment in the print version, we ask you to include the following on your blog, in close proximity to the link for the pdf version:

1. A copyright notice reading “© 2008 School for Advanced Research Press”;
2. A link to your book’s page on our website, with text stating that viewers can purchase the book from SAR Press by clicking on the link.

SAR still maintains copyright, but my goal of allowing more distribution is met by facilitating electronic circulation of the final book. By linking to SAR we can track the direct traffic and I can keep track of downloads as well. I believe that most people will still buy the book. In fact, for University courses this is a plus, Professors can check out the book without having to order a desk copy and then decide on the book. Most students will still buy the book–it would still be pretty expensive to print off a 300 page book. It’s a win-win, especially for younger scholars such as myself who have little reputation to go on.

The more presses and publishers start to take chances and negotiate deals (there doesn’t need to be a one-size-fits-all mentality) the more academic work will be made more widely available, not just to those small subgroups we often imagine we are writing for. I still don’t love the “open access” rhetoric, because it leaves out too much in its default to open = good. These two negotiated deals highlight one way to parse up the open access debate and develop a sense of agency for authors who often feel they have no voice in the process.

Last week Australia finished up its “2020 summit,” a sport of big national think tank on a range of issues. Here are the questions, ideas and stats that informed the “Options for the Future of Indigenous Australia” session. I’m embedding their powerpoint as a slide show here. But you can get it yourself on the 2020 summit site here, along with the initial report, here.

| View | Upload your own

Also of interest is the Creative Australia session as it singled out Indigenous arts and as well as heritage movements that include digitizing national collections. The initial report states that:

Creativity is central to Australian life and Indigenous culture is the core to this. To measure, document and leverage the strengths of this culture, to articulate our role and improve protection of indigenous culture, language and heritage through a National Indigenous Cultural Authority.

Of course who will make up this new group is anyone’s guess. But there is a glimmer of hope here that there could be some national funds and importantly infrastructure aimed at Indigenous heritage projects which could include digital projects.

From Indigenous Issues Today a story about the Navajo Nation:

The Navajo Nation Council will vote on the “Navajo Nation Unauthorized Recording Act of 2007” (Legislation No. 0836-07) this week at the Council Spring Session April 21-25, 2008.

Sheephead films also made a documentary “Pirates of the Navajo Nation.” The film shows Navajo artists who talk about how their work is being burned onto CDs and then re-sold on the Navajo Nation at big outdoor markets. Several of the people interviewed also make a distinction between themselves as artists and corporations that are selling products. The law they are trying to pass (as far as I can tell) deals with “piracy” in terms of the selling of bootleg CDs on the Navajo Nation. It doesn’t seem to address any specific issues of “traditional” music of knowledge per se. In that way, I wonder what this sets the stage for? It seems to be an attempt to control the circulation of pirated CDs, not necessarily an attempt to limit other forms of knowledge circulation. Here the first part of the movie (you can watch it all on YouTube or at the Sheephead Films site):

From Prensa Latina:

Mayan TV Launched in Guatemala

Guatemala, Apr 23 (Prensa Latina) For the first time in history, as of today Guatemala will have a Mayan TV channel to spread the culture, values, languages and views of native peoples.

The Mayan TV was inaugurated at a ceremony attended by Guatemalan President Alvaro Colom, Minister of Culture and Sports Jeronimo Lancerio and indigenous leader, Nobel Peace Prize laureate Rigoberta Menchu, among other figures.

Today is a day of enormous pride for our country, as the first TV signal is opened for the Maya people, but also for other indigenous peoples in Guatemala (xinca, garifuna and ladine), said the Minister of Culture.

He considered a breakthrough to have granted indogenous peoples a frequency used by the army during the internal armed conflict that left over 250,000 dead, mostly farmers in rural areas.

The start of transmissions on channel five was achieved thanks to an effort by the Academy of Mayan Languages, on an initial cost of $800,000.

From the folks at ANTaR:

A new national campaign calling on all Australians to take action against racism and tackle the Indigenous health crisis will be launched today by ANTaR (Australians for Native Title and Reconciliation) in collaboration with The Body Shop.

The Body Shop stores nationally will promote the Racism Makes Me Sick campaign from 21 April 2008 – 12 May 2008 as part of their commitment to defending human rights and promoting Reconciliation in Australia.

I happy to announce that the first wholly new content, open access version of MAR is online as of today. You can access the articles and download the pdfs here. It would help all of this in this new endeavor if folks would take a minute and register, it’s free and easy!

Here’s a peek at the table of contents:

Articles
——–
The Murals of a Village Temple: Heaven, Earth, and People (1-26)
Jin Feng

Lessons Lived and Learned in Developing and Managing a Bi-National Cultural
Heritage Sector Project in South Africa (27-43)
C. Kurt Dewhurst, Narissa Ramdhani, Marsha MacDowell

Book Reviews
——–
Judging Exhibitions: A Framework for Assessing Excellence (Serrell) (44-46)
Kym S. Rice

New Museum Theory and Practice: An Introduction (Marstine, ed.) (47-48)
Laura Peers

Ways of the Rivers: Arts and Environment of the Niger Delta (Anderson and
Peek, eds.) (49-51)
Christopher Slogar

Database Reviews
——–
The Museum of English Rural Life (52-53)
Elise DeCamp

Here’s what Major General Dave Chalmers had to say today:

“Communities are indundated by local government, Territory Government, Federal Govenrment well meaning people coming and sadly a lot of that is lost because people come from essentially a different cultural background.”

Ya think? This is his take TEN MONTHS in? Wow. Breathtaking. Seriously.

Yes, I know, headlines are supposed to grab one’s attention and all…so I suppose this worked. The ABC online is running a story with the headline: “Intervention linked to tourism spike.” The entire post reads:

A Northern Territory tourism body says the federal intervention into Aboriginal affairs has given business a boost in Darwin and Alice Springs.

Figures from the Australian Bureau of Statistics comparing last year’s December quarter with the same time in 2006 show a five per cent jump in the number of nights hotel rooms were occupied.

But Tourism Top End’s Tony Clementson says the intervention wasn’t the only reason for a growth in the market.

“The federal intervention has most definitely impacted (but) we have certainly had growth in leisure activity from the domestic sector with the introduction of more services from interstate with Jetstar and Tiger and Virgin and Qantas.”

OK…so, really the intervention did not cause a “spike” in “tourism” it caused a lot of bureaucrats and military folks to need hotel accommodation in Alice Springs and Darwin as they were busy cutting off Aboriginal people’s welfare payments and “leasing” their property. This has nothing to do with “tourism” in any sense of the term. Surely all hotel stays are not factored into tourism numbers, so why imply that the intervention was somehow good for tourism…it was however (and is) good for business.

I’ve designed a new course:

Exhibiting Culture: Museums, Media and Indigenous Cultures:

This course examines historical and contemporary practices of “exhibiting” culture in museums, in print, television, film, and online. Specifically we will explore the ways in which Indigenous cultures have been exhibited by others and equally how Indigenous peoples have produced their own exhibitions, displays, and media not only in reaction to dominant non-Indigenous representations, but out of long histories of performance, tradition and political organization. The class will focus on the paradigms of exhibition, the material practices of display and the political economy of cultural display globally. This course aims to familiarize students with the social, historical and political terrain of exhibitionary practices through ethnographic examples, critical theories and historical accounts. We will move through specific themes that relate to Indigenous museum and media practices critically analyzing the form and content, the historical significance and the modes of production in relation to the heterogeneity of Indigenous realities globally. The class will begin with a general introduction to museum practices grounded in colonial enterprises and move through to examine contemporary Indigenous media grounded in critical theories of museum studies, media, history, and indigeneity. These critical perspectives will give us a foundation to build upon for the rest of the course.

I’m still putting together the reading list. If anyone has any suggestions of books or articles they like I’d love to hear about them.