RECAP: ARC Biennial Sourcing Emotions Conference

Winthrop Hall, University of Western Australia

Last week, the Australian Research Council held its Biennial Sourcing Emotions conference at the University of Western Australia. I was fortunate enough to have a paper selected for presentation at the conference, and jumped at this unique opportunity to connect with academics involved in the study of emotions in the Middle Ages and early modern Europe. The ARC Centre of Excellence for the History of Emotions provides an institutional sanctuary – and I don’t think “sanctuary” is a dramatic term, many scholars iterated their gratitude towards the ARC in bringing them together and “out of isolation” as one plenary speaker noted – for this still-nascent field that is absent from the American university system, buoyed by a $24 million grant from the Australian government, the largest grant bestowed to the humanities in the history of Australia.

My goal here is to provide a short recap of the conference. Since the conference followed a parallel-session format, I am unable to comment on a number of the panels. As an upfront disclaimer, I admit that I was drawn to panels that included emotions in the New World, the colonization of Australia, Anglo-Aboriginal interactions in early Australia, and reading emotions in early modern English literature.

The conference began on June 26 with an opening reception highlighted by brief comments delivered by chief investigators of each respective ARC research node: Bob White on “Meanings,” David Lemmings on “Change,” Jane Davidson on “Performance,” and Stephanie Trigg on “Shaping the Modern.” All four touched upon the desire to further the cause of the study of the history of emotion as a fully accepted theme defined by interdisciplinary approaches and a variety of mixed methodologies. Trigg’s defense of the study of emotions  - even if the title” shaping the modern” is problematic because of the evocation of the tricky term “modernity” – as a pursuit more complex and (self-admittedly) more interesting than the ill-informed axiom of history as “one thing after another” resonated with everyone in attendance.

One of the early panels on Thursday morning focused on accounts of colonial Australia. Sue Broomhall gave a thought-provoking account of Dutch VOC wrecks in Australia. Citing the formation of “affective economies,” Broomhall concluded that individual emotional expression was shaped by one’s position within the VOC hierarchy; interestingly while most acknowledge that any type of disaster – in this case, shipwrecks – have acted as a means of social equalization, the evocation of expression as a result of a disaster was allowed within only certain strati of the company’s structure. Additionally, Broomhall argued that this weakness as perceived by seamen tied VOC members together into a shared faith community, helping establish a boundary by which the Dutch distinguished themselves from others. Also in the early panel, Claire McLisky’s study on the economy of gratitude in colonial Australia explained the rise of aboriginal designations as virtuous or sinful. The expectation of gratitude by the British and subsequent refusal of Western attempts at education and proselytization formed an “elegiac tone” regarding missionary efforts, contributing to the rise of the trope of the ungrateful Indian. I could not help but be reminded of Seth Mallios’ work on colonial Virginia during her presentation; like McLisky, Mallios argued – albeit, in a reversal of fortunes – how repeatedly instances of perceived European ingratitude within the Algonquian moral economy resulted in violent outbursts at Ajacan, Roanoke, and Jamestown.

The later Thursday morning panel found the emotions of early modern settlers as a connecting theme. Lesley Silvester provided an emotional map through which sixteenth- and seventeenth-century sailors navigated, correlating specific times of the journey and the likelihood of certain emotional expression.  For example, the preparatory stage just before setting sail was usually colored by excitement for leaving port, but also affection and sadness because seamen had to say goodbye. Instances of mutiny – the drastic breakdown of social hierarchy – prompted displays of arrogance, both by the mutineers, who believed themselves capable of delivering the ship and crew out of a specific situation, and the captain, who usually remained calm and confident in his abilities and the perseverance of social norms through trying times.  The sailing ship, in short, was an emotional community. A remark during the Q & A session revealed that the sources – male, and mostly written after the voyage had been complete – show an absence of emotional expression towards the act of the return to port, which is somewhat puzzling considering how emotional the voyage itself was portrayed.

During the same panel on emotional early modern settlers, Jacqueline Van Gent presented on Moravian missions and colonial emotional encounters, asking how formulaic expression of emotion related to social situations and mediated social events. Utilizing Benedict Anderson’s framework of an “imagined community” of Moravians on a global scale, Gent noted how two specific themes drew Moravians together through ritual structural and an exchange of texts: first, the love of Christ and his suffering and second, the state of the heart (described by Gent as either “moved” or “unmoved”). These themes, displayed prominently through mission diaries, illustrate a disconnect between rhetoric and practice; semantic expressions were dependent upon social contexts and dictated relationships, yet at the same time needed to fulfill the expectations of a readership.

Katie Gregory closed the late morning panel with a presentation on emotions of encounter in North West Australian colonial heritage sites. Utilizing one specific site – the shire of Roebourne – Gregory argued that northwestern “nodes of colonial frontier” remained affective environments of conflict and contestation. Interesting, I noted how the language of colonization that exists in the sources used by Gregory – early writings on the Dampier Archipelago, especially those of William Shakespeare Hall – contains rhetoric similar to the early Virginia travel accounts. Although separated by 250-300 years, both groups of sources contain wonder and an overall scientific paradigm focused on the natural resources of the landscape; not only are these 1860s sites of colonization in the North West spatial sites of heritages, but the sources themselves seem to possess a much longer heritage of English/British exploration in their language.

The highlight of the afternoon session on emotion in New World discoveries was Vivienne Westbrook’s paper, “Shark!” Asserting that the teeth of the shark have assumed the role of an emoticon in the present, Westbrook sought to see where this seemingly visceral human reaction to sharks originated. The first English accounts of sharks – for example, those from Hawkins – mention little sense of fear amongst seamen; the attacks were described in “matter-of-fact” tones and in some instances actually drew communities closer together through the act of eating the beast. When, then, did the shark become an object of fear? While her research is still ongoing, Westbrook claims that the transition from benign ocean-dweller to denizen of the deep occurred in the late eighteenth century, and concluded that a better understanding of humans’ fears is needed in order to help save a dwindling worldwide shark population.

Friday morning was highlighted by Sarah Ann Robin’s presentation on the materiality of marriage in seventeenth-century Britain and America. According to Robin, material both shaped and was shaped by expectations. After displaying a number of different wedding gifts – including gloves, clothes, domestic utensils, and furniture – she spent the rest of her presentation examining posy rings. Robin’s findings regarding the rings were somewhat surprising: through quantitative analysis of posy ring inscriptions, we are left with the conclusion that decoration was not indicative of gender specificity. In other words, most of the phrases and terms within the inscriptions focused on the terms “you,” “I,” and “our” (“God” was the amongst the top four common terms as well, for logical reasons). In addition to the genderless rhetoric of the inscriptions, the size of the rings themselves lend credence to the argument that declarations of love lacked gender specificity; the sizes of the rings Robin examined proved – in her words – “genderless in nature,” often being larger than other types of rings worn by women, and smaller than men’s rings. In the end, rings represent a material junction of the private and public, as the personal inscriptions are never seen because of their placement on the inside of the ring, yet the object itself – and all the emotional connotations associated with it – remains on display for everyone to see.

 The afternoon saw a panel dominated by work on bewitchment and emotion. Of note, Charlotte-Rose Millar’s presentation on emotionally vulnerable witches in seventeenth-century England posed an interesting observation: many portrayals of witches in print highlight the heightened emotional state of the accused at the perceived moment of the Devil’s appearance. This, of course, goes against the grain of the notion of a witch’s intimate relationship with the Devil as a rational choice. The Devil played on emotional displays of rage, hatred, and malice: Joan Flowers (1619) was angry about recently losing her job, Elizabeth Sawyer (1621) proved prone to bouts of cursing, and John Winnox (1646) was upset over lost money. All these examples demonstrate a clear connection between witchcraft, diabolism, and emotional outbursts. Interestingly, this phenomenon was present only in the first half of the seventeenth-century.

A number of the final sessions on Saturday dealt with emotional expression in English literature, especially Shakespeare’s works. Kelly Midgley reinterpreted the role of Nick Bottom in Midsummer’s Night Dream, casting the seemingly comic relief as a standard everyman role, his ostentatious actions driven by self esteem issues and emotional transformation. Brid Phillips considered color in Othello – not in terms of race, but emotion – noting how displays and mention of red (martyrdom, courage) and green (jealousy) highlighted changes in the passions of the characters Color, then, may be utilized as an entry point for the study of early modern emotions. Tiffany Hoffman posited that the origins of the name “Shylock” from Merchant of Venice derived from the character’s socially constructed and locked position as a Jew, epitomized by his “shyness” in the early modern sense, his belief in impending shame. Imogen Forbes-MacPhail argued that comedy and tragedy is more complex than a simple binary, and that we should consider a both examples of loss of control relative to normal life, yet to different degrees. Lastly, Bob White noted how Shakespearean drama acts as a bridge between English and Indian culture, as many of Shakespeare’s works include a number of different genres…much like present day Bollywood productions.

James Amelang delivering his plenary talk, titled "The Sources of Mourning"

The final plenary lecture, delivered by James Amelang, provided an important reminder for methodological approaches to the history of emotions in the early modern era: as historians, we must be sensitive to emotional intensity in seemingly unemotional texts. Amelang, who has written extensively on plague outbreaks, notes that sources will not cooperate with our twenty-first century expectations of the emotional cadence sought in autobiographies, and be disappointed by most documents’ “laconic, detached tones.” Instead of searching for emotionally-rich sources, works classified by Amelang as “ego documents,” it is necessary to instead be sensitive to “ego excerpts,” necessitating a delicate reading of available sources.

I will be the first to admit, this recap really doesn’t begin to scratch the surface of all the scholarship that was discussed in Perth. The overall experience was both stimulating and invigorating. At the same time, observing the success of the ARC intensified my awareness of still how much work is needed in order to establish some sort of interdisciplinary institutional center in America for the study of emotions. We can only hope to replicate what the ARC has been able to accomplish in Australia. The recent news that affect will be recognized as a subsection within the American Academy of Religion is an encouraging start. Progress on this front remains necessary.