日本动画回顾:东亚视角-横田正雄、胡子岳主编

Marco Pellitteri
{"title":"日本动画回顾:东亚视角-横田正雄、胡子岳主编","authors":"Marco Pellitteri","doi":"10.32926/2018.5.R.PEL.JAPAN","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the capacity of general editor for this journal, I have supervised a few book reviews by fellow scholars and have written two myself: this one and another for the next issue (Teaching Japanese Popular Culture, edited by D. Shamoon and C. McMorran, AAS 2016). Through these experiences, I realised even more now than ever before how scholars share certain ways of thinking about edited books. A considerable number of academics, myself included, who have reviewed edited books—e.g. the reviews in this and in the upcoming issue—implicitly divide collections into two overarching groups: those which have an organically, ex ante designed structure, and those which are put together ex post (there are also “hybrid” cases). In the first, ex ante group are collective works organised around a theme proposed by the editor(s), which can be based either on an open but very specific CFP, or on ad personam invitations to contribute on the basis of a project designed a priori by the editor. The latter composition strategy is by far the best to follow for an edited book. It is also the criterion used for so-called “handbooks”, reference texts with a somewhat encyclopaedic organisation but which are far beyond the classic idea of knowledge listed in alphabetical order and, on the contrary, possess a certain agility, transversality, and scholarly dynamism in the display of their contents. In the second, ex post group we find, for the most part, collections stemming from conferences and symposia. It is not per se that collections based on this criterion are ipso facto worse than or inferior to the ex ante structure. The distinguishing trait is not quality; there are organically edited works in the ex ante group whose chapters oscillate from mediocrity to greatness, and miscellaneous collections in the ex post group whose chapters, however detached from each other, are all of good-to-outstanding value. But in my experience as a reader and a scholar, it is much harder for unorganised collections to reach the same standard and orderly structure compared to the collections of the ex ante group. \nI shall explain this further later on, but first [...]","PeriodicalId":199469,"journal":{"name":"Mutual Images Journal","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Review of Japanese Animation: East Asian Perspectives- Ed. by Masao Yokota and Tze-Yue G.Hu\",\"authors\":\"Marco Pellitteri\",\"doi\":\"10.32926/2018.5.R.PEL.JAPAN\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the capacity of general editor for this journal, I have supervised a few book reviews by fellow scholars and have written two myself: this one and another for the next issue (Teaching Japanese Popular Culture, edited by D. Shamoon and C. McMorran, AAS 2016). Through these experiences, I realised even more now than ever before how scholars share certain ways of thinking about edited books. A considerable number of academics, myself included, who have reviewed edited books—e.g. the reviews in this and in the upcoming issue—implicitly divide collections into two overarching groups: those which have an organically, ex ante designed structure, and those which are put together ex post (there are also “hybrid” cases). In the first, ex ante group are collective works organised around a theme proposed by the editor(s), which can be based either on an open but very specific CFP, or on ad personam invitations to contribute on the basis of a project designed a priori by the editor. The latter composition strategy is by far the best to follow for an edited book. It is also the criterion used for so-called “handbooks”, reference texts with a somewhat encyclopaedic organisation but which are far beyond the classic idea of knowledge listed in alphabetical order and, on the contrary, possess a certain agility, transversality, and scholarly dynamism in the display of their contents. In the second, ex post group we find, for the most part, collections stemming from conferences and symposia. It is not per se that collections based on this criterion are ipso facto worse than or inferior to the ex ante structure. The distinguishing trait is not quality; there are organically edited works in the ex ante group whose chapters oscillate from mediocrity to greatness, and miscellaneous collections in the ex post group whose chapters, however detached from each other, are all of good-to-outstanding value. But in my experience as a reader and a scholar, it is much harder for unorganised collections to reach the same standard and orderly structure compared to the collections of the ex ante group. \\nI shall explain this further later on, but first [...]\",\"PeriodicalId\":199469,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Mutual Images Journal\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-12-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Mutual Images Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.32926/2018.5.R.PEL.JAPAN\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mutual Images Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32926/2018.5.R.PEL.JAPAN","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在本刊总编辑的职位上,我监督了一些学者的书评,并自己写了两篇书评:这一篇和下一期的另一篇(教学日本流行文化,由D. Shamoon和C. McMorran编辑,AAS 2016)。通过这些经历,我比以往任何时候都更加意识到学者们是如何分享对编辑书籍的某些思考方式的。相当多的学者,包括我自己,都对编辑过的书进行过评论。本期和下一期的评论含蓄地将系列分为两大类:一种是事先设计好的有机结构,另一种是事后设计的(也有“混合”的情况)。首先,事前小组是围绕编辑提出的主题组织的集体作品,可以基于开放但非常具体的CFP,也可以基于编辑预先设计的项目的个人邀请。对于编辑过的书来说,后一种构图策略是迄今为止最好的。这也是用于所谓“手册”的标准,这些参考文本具有某种百科全书式的组织,但远远超出了按字母顺序列出的知识的经典理念,相反,在展示其内容时具有一定的敏捷性、横向性和学术活力。在第二个,事后组,我们发现,在大多数情况下,收集来自会议和专题讨论会。从本质上说,基于这一标准的收集事实上并不比事先的结构更差或更差。区别性的特征不是质量;在事前组中有有机编辑的作品,其章节从平庸到伟大,而在事后组中有杂项收藏,其章节无论如何彼此分离,都具有良好到卓越的价值。但根据我作为读者和学者的经验,与有组织的藏书相比,无组织的藏书要达到同样的标准和有序结构要困难得多。稍后我将进一步解释这一点,但首先……
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Review of Japanese Animation: East Asian Perspectives- Ed. by Masao Yokota and Tze-Yue G.Hu
In the capacity of general editor for this journal, I have supervised a few book reviews by fellow scholars and have written two myself: this one and another for the next issue (Teaching Japanese Popular Culture, edited by D. Shamoon and C. McMorran, AAS 2016). Through these experiences, I realised even more now than ever before how scholars share certain ways of thinking about edited books. A considerable number of academics, myself included, who have reviewed edited books—e.g. the reviews in this and in the upcoming issue—implicitly divide collections into two overarching groups: those which have an organically, ex ante designed structure, and those which are put together ex post (there are also “hybrid” cases). In the first, ex ante group are collective works organised around a theme proposed by the editor(s), which can be based either on an open but very specific CFP, or on ad personam invitations to contribute on the basis of a project designed a priori by the editor. The latter composition strategy is by far the best to follow for an edited book. It is also the criterion used for so-called “handbooks”, reference texts with a somewhat encyclopaedic organisation but which are far beyond the classic idea of knowledge listed in alphabetical order and, on the contrary, possess a certain agility, transversality, and scholarly dynamism in the display of their contents. In the second, ex post group we find, for the most part, collections stemming from conferences and symposia. It is not per se that collections based on this criterion are ipso facto worse than or inferior to the ex ante structure. The distinguishing trait is not quality; there are organically edited works in the ex ante group whose chapters oscillate from mediocrity to greatness, and miscellaneous collections in the ex post group whose chapters, however detached from each other, are all of good-to-outstanding value. But in my experience as a reader and a scholar, it is much harder for unorganised collections to reach the same standard and orderly structure compared to the collections of the ex ante group. I shall explain this further later on, but first [...]
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信