Appendix A is the collated results of Faculty Researchers Survey carried out for the article "Student Labour and Training in Digital Humanities." Digital Humanities Quarterly 9.2 (Spring 2015).
Appendix B is the collated results of Student Researchers Survey carried out for the article "Student Labour and Training in Digital Humanities." Digital Humanities Quarterly 9.2 (Spring 2015).
Crucible was a Canadian literary magazine that ran from March 1932 to April-May 1943. Crucible has been largely left out of historical surveys of Canadian little magazines, and turning our attention to Crucible now can provide us with an alternative perspective on Canadian culture through the 1930s and 1940s. Further, we cannot overlook the fact that Crucible was edited by two women: Hilda and Laura Ridley. As Dean Irvine points out in Editing Modernity: Women and Little-Magazine Cultures in Canada, 1916-1956, Hilda Ridley “should now be recognized (albeit belatedly) as one of the first woman editors of a modern literary magazine in Canada” (206). The Ridley sisters were pioneers not only for their own efforts as editors, writers, and marketers but they were also champions of poetry authored by women. To continue overlooking Crucible is to ignore a significant repository of Canadian women’s voices echoing throughout this time period.
This index is arranged by contributor. Works attached to known pseudonyms or initials are grouped together beneath the most complete name and spelling inconsistencies (such as Today versus To-day) have also been left as they originally appeared.
Here's one from the archives. Though her star seems to have faded now, Luce Irigaray once wore the crown--or the designer cardigan--of theoretical fashion, and was revered accordingly. When I got around to reading her work, I couldn't quite believe it. This paper, presented at a graduate conference called "Figuring the Body" at the University of California in 2000, was an attempt to articulate my incredulity. Intended as a humorous, polemical response to Irigaray's polemical nonsense, the paper was, well, not warmly received. Heretics are rarely popular. Rereading this piece today I find it at times embarrassingly amateurish and undisciplined. Were I to write it today it would be more precise, perhaps more gracious, and certainly better supported; and, as a result, probably a lot less fun.