Personal notes from Tim Burke in preparation for first session, in response to the questions sent to us.
1 & 2: (how might what we read affect our approach to collaboration)
Black Mountain suggests value of isolation and the need for some prior alignment of sensibility. Reminds me that the bad thing about massively multiplayer-games might be that they push together too many strangers with too many incommensurable views about the purpose of their presence in the game, leading to lots of negative attempts to protect from unwanted collaboration.
Do R&D models in industry or elsewhere produce better results from research collaborations (re: Bozeman et al.) Might there be something that isn’t property-based but isn’t knowledge-based? Project-based? Output-based? Maker-based? Increments to expression? Increments to production? “Hyperauthorship” an interesting idea.
p. 18 Bozeman et al typologies of collaboration types is really fertile for discussion
The damage that the myth of the solitary genius does us! So bad! But it has such deep consequences that the Inge essay doesn’t even get to. Interesting paradox, though: the collaboration that was strongest when the myth of the solitary genius was strongest (editorial, etc.) is now most absent when the figure of collaborative authorship is most celebrated.
3: (thought experiment: what to do to answer these questions)
Find people with direct experience of some of the possibilities I’m imagining.
Would like to hear more from scientists about actual workflow of co-authoring; the things that aren’t spoken of to public view (etiquette, annoyances, etc.)
4. (What does the reading make you want to track down and read):
Scholarship on hyperauthorship; I want to read more about ghostwriting and other forms of ‘invisible collaboration’ but also the Stillinger book again. Can I get account of Inge and Stillinger impact on literary scholarship? Seems to me that this view has not changed much rhetorically? Or that we deal with collaboration by talking about systems, etc. (history of the book) rather than modes of literary/knowledge-making labor?
5. (other things reading could cite)
Still really interested in crowdsourcing, open-source, etc. models for collaboration, which are I think genuinely different than these examples in both impact and structure.
6. (How did you take notes?)
These are my notes! I wish they were better. I need to stabilize note taking practices, really. Collaborative note-taking would be an interesting thing to talk about--esp. how to keep it from being something more like 'minutes for a meeting'. Notetaking that meshes multiple styles of note-taking? That doesn't try to be an objective 'voice of the group' or a detached observer?
7. (Discussing these readings with students)
First question I would have for students is why most of them (legitimately I think) hate group projects/group work. That seems like a big thing for us to talk about--why collaboration seems like such a great idea (or an important skill) but often is unpleasant, burdensome or risky.