{"title":"介绍","authors":"Evan F. Kuehn","doi":"10.1080/10477845.2022.2038048","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In her classic work What is Documentation?, Suzanne Briet writes, “Is a star a document? Is a pebble rolled by a torrent a document? Is a living animal a document? No. But the photographs and the catalogues of stars, the stones in a museum of mineralogy, and the animals that are cataloged and shown in a zoo, are documents.” (Briet et al. 2006, p. 10). We might similarly say of religion that it is not itself a document, although it can be documented, perhaps through some technology of recording or testimony, perhaps even through display and observation, as an antelope in a zoo, and certainly through the enormous source literature of textual documentation produced by the world’s religions. Bringing religious studies and theology into conversation with documentation studies seems obvious: religious scribes were among the first professional document makers, and religious law, incantations, holy writ, and sacred genealogies all have long documentary histories. The semiotics of the Apostle Paul and Augustine of Hippo are easily traced to discussion of indexicality and aboutness in 20th and 21st century theories of documentation, as well as theories of documentality (see Ferraris 2013, pp. 281–286). In addition to being obvious, the field of religious documentation is necessary because of the new problems and opportunities it suggests. Significant work has already been done on religious documentation. To name only a few exemplary recent studies, Rachel Muers and Rhiannon Grant have proposed a documentary theology approach in research on Quaker history (Muers and Grant 2018). Tim Gorichanaz’s phenomenological research on sacred documents (Gorichanaz 2016), and the late Alease Brown’s research on protest speech, hashtags, and tattoos as articulating religious confession (Brown 2020) are recent examples of the generative possibilities of document studies both for sacred texts and non-text objects. All seek to show how religious life can be understood through communicative objects it generates, whether or not these objects are textual and independent of what their texts directly communicate. This special issue of JRTI contributes to the existing literature with three https://doi.org/10.1080/10477845.2022.2038048","PeriodicalId":35378,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Religious and Theological Information","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Introduction\",\"authors\":\"Evan F. Kuehn\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10477845.2022.2038048\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In her classic work What is Documentation?, Suzanne Briet writes, “Is a star a document? Is a pebble rolled by a torrent a document? Is a living animal a document? No. But the photographs and the catalogues of stars, the stones in a museum of mineralogy, and the animals that are cataloged and shown in a zoo, are documents.” (Briet et al. 2006, p. 10). We might similarly say of religion that it is not itself a document, although it can be documented, perhaps through some technology of recording or testimony, perhaps even through display and observation, as an antelope in a zoo, and certainly through the enormous source literature of textual documentation produced by the world’s religions. Bringing religious studies and theology into conversation with documentation studies seems obvious: religious scribes were among the first professional document makers, and religious law, incantations, holy writ, and sacred genealogies all have long documentary histories. The semiotics of the Apostle Paul and Augustine of Hippo are easily traced to discussion of indexicality and aboutness in 20th and 21st century theories of documentation, as well as theories of documentality (see Ferraris 2013, pp. 281–286). In addition to being obvious, the field of religious documentation is necessary because of the new problems and opportunities it suggests. Significant work has already been done on religious documentation. To name only a few exemplary recent studies, Rachel Muers and Rhiannon Grant have proposed a documentary theology approach in research on Quaker history (Muers and Grant 2018). Tim Gorichanaz’s phenomenological research on sacred documents (Gorichanaz 2016), and the late Alease Brown’s research on protest speech, hashtags, and tattoos as articulating religious confession (Brown 2020) are recent examples of the generative possibilities of document studies both for sacred texts and non-text objects. All seek to show how religious life can be understood through communicative objects it generates, whether or not these objects are textual and independent of what their texts directly communicate. This special issue of JRTI contributes to the existing literature with three https://doi.org/10.1080/10477845.2022.2038048\",\"PeriodicalId\":35378,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Religious and Theological Information\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Religious and Theological Information\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10477845.2022.2038048\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Religious and Theological Information","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10477845.2022.2038048","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
在她的经典著作《什么是文档?》,苏珊娜·布里特写道:“星星是一份文件吗?被激流卷起的鹅卵石是一份文件吗?活的动物是文件吗?不。但是,星星的照片和目录,矿物学博物馆里的石头,动物园里被编目和展出的动物,都是文件。(Briet et al. 2006,第10页)。我们也可以类似地说,宗教本身并不是一种文献,尽管它可以被记录下来,也许是通过一些记录或见证的技术,也许是通过展示和观察,就像动物园里的羚羊,当然也可以通过世界各宗教产生的大量文本文献。将宗教研究和神学与文献研究结合起来似乎是显而易见的:宗教文士是最早的专业文献制作者之一,宗教法、咒语、圣书和神圣家谱都有很长的文献历史。使徒保罗和河马的奥古斯丁的符号学很容易追溯到20世纪和21世纪文献理论以及文献理论中对索引性和相关性的讨论(见法拉利2013年,第281-286页)。除了显而易见之外,宗教文献领域是必要的,因为它提出了新的问题和机会。在宗教文件方面已经做了大量工作。仅举几个最近的典型研究,雷切尔·米尔斯和里安农·格兰特在贵格会历史研究中提出了一种文献神学方法(米尔斯和格兰特2018)。Tim Gorichanaz对神圣文件的现象学研究(Gorichanaz 2016),以及已故的Alease Brown对抗议演讲、标签和纹身作为表达宗教忏悔的研究(Brown 2020),都是神圣文本和非文本对象的文件研究生成可能性的最新例子。所有这些都试图表明,如何通过宗教生活产生的交流对象来理解宗教生活,无论这些对象是否具有文本性,是否独立于文本直接传达的内容。本期《JRTI》特刊对现有文献的贡献有三个https://doi.org/10.1080/10477845.2022.2038048
In her classic work What is Documentation?, Suzanne Briet writes, “Is a star a document? Is a pebble rolled by a torrent a document? Is a living animal a document? No. But the photographs and the catalogues of stars, the stones in a museum of mineralogy, and the animals that are cataloged and shown in a zoo, are documents.” (Briet et al. 2006, p. 10). We might similarly say of religion that it is not itself a document, although it can be documented, perhaps through some technology of recording or testimony, perhaps even through display and observation, as an antelope in a zoo, and certainly through the enormous source literature of textual documentation produced by the world’s religions. Bringing religious studies and theology into conversation with documentation studies seems obvious: religious scribes were among the first professional document makers, and religious law, incantations, holy writ, and sacred genealogies all have long documentary histories. The semiotics of the Apostle Paul and Augustine of Hippo are easily traced to discussion of indexicality and aboutness in 20th and 21st century theories of documentation, as well as theories of documentality (see Ferraris 2013, pp. 281–286). In addition to being obvious, the field of religious documentation is necessary because of the new problems and opportunities it suggests. Significant work has already been done on religious documentation. To name only a few exemplary recent studies, Rachel Muers and Rhiannon Grant have proposed a documentary theology approach in research on Quaker history (Muers and Grant 2018). Tim Gorichanaz’s phenomenological research on sacred documents (Gorichanaz 2016), and the late Alease Brown’s research on protest speech, hashtags, and tattoos as articulating religious confession (Brown 2020) are recent examples of the generative possibilities of document studies both for sacred texts and non-text objects. All seek to show how religious life can be understood through communicative objects it generates, whether or not these objects are textual and independent of what their texts directly communicate. This special issue of JRTI contributes to the existing literature with three https://doi.org/10.1080/10477845.2022.2038048
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Religious & Theological Information is an essential resource for bibliographers, librarians, and scholars interested in the literature of religion and theology. Both international and pluralistic in scope, this peer-reviewed journal encourages the publication of research and scholarship in the field of library and information studies as it relates to religious studies and related fields, including philosophy, ethnic studies, anthropology, sociology, and historical approaches to religion. By "information" we refer to both print and electronic, and both published and unpublished information.