| subtext | |
|
|
subtext
issue 7 1 May 2006 ***************************************************** 'Truth: lies open to all' ***************************************************** Every fortnight Now with 632 subscribers All editorial correspondence to: subtext-editors [at] lancaster.ac.uk Please download and print or delete as soon as possible after receipt. ***************************************************** CONTENTS: editorial; news in Brief; no rumours; Marcus Merriman tribute; Stanley Henig: well, what was it like in the old days? Synergy: a new game for those long afternoons at committees; letters ***************************************************** 1. EDITORIAL Welcome back to Lancaster in the summer term, and a campus filled with building, business process re-engineering, and the successful prosecution of the George Fox 6 at their re-trial at Preston Crown Court. Other highlights include uncertainties about RAE 2008 (see News in Brief), the vacancies of three College Principalships, and news about present and former staff members, including the sad death of Marcus Merriman. subtext issue 7 kicks off the promised 'history of protest at Lancaster' series with a piece by Stanley Henig about Lancaster in 1964. Stanley's account is fascinating: as history; as an insight into a different era; and as a marker of the way in which the universities have so profoundly changed since 1964. You pays your money and you takes your choice. There were goods and bads about 1964. Gender issues were invisible to most. Higher education, though growing with the 'new universities' including Lancaster, was still exclusive; and there isn't much doubt that some academics were less than active publishers, though often they worked dedicatedly for their institutions in all sorts of other ways - many of which are scarcely valued today. Then again, protest was starting to flex its muscles. Within a few years, students and staff were picketing and occupying buildings in support of radical causes: against censorship; against the Vietnam war; in favour of experiments in self-government and democracy; and (perhaps most poignantly, given current conditions) against the commercialisation of the university (E.P. Thompson's robust and instructive Warwick University Limited appeared in 1970: you'll find it in the library.) Some of this history is simply history, but a lot of it is depressingly relevant to our current predicament. How do we respect the freedom to protest? How do we resist the pressure to think about bottom lines and nothing else? How do we respond to students rather than 'customers'? How do we imagine our roles as researchers as something other than a reflection of the demands of policymakers and the private sector? subtext proposes that a university is an amalgam of different values that don't sit easily together. It also suggests that a good manager is someone who knows this and, crucially, knows it in her/his guts. S/he appreciates that things won't cohere and that this lack of coherence isn't a problem. S/he understands that difference isn't something to be beaten down as ill-disciplined but instead appreciates that it lies at the heart of creativity in any university. And this is where we seem to have gone wrong. No doubt we have different views about the values of managerialism. But whatever their merits or otherwise, the current version of managerial values is one-dimensional. Enterprise? Grant-getting? Links with the private sector (what happened to other third mission possibilities?) Efficiency? Individual responsibility? Individual rewards? (What happened to the idea that we are a collectivity?) A pseudo-market (like that in professorial salaries)? Performance indicators? More performance indicators? Yet more performance indicators? There is more to life - and a university - than this. Our management can't ignore the realities handed down from HEFCE and the DFE. But at the same time it might also reflect that the university is a multi-dimensional creature. It might also do well to develop a sense of irony since this is something that is clearly needed when dealing with the often absurdist realities that bodies such as HEFCE promote. Thus far Lancaster's management have shown a severe lack of intelligent management irony - surely something that is essential in today's university environment? ***************************************************** 2. NEWS IN BRIEF The funeral of Marcus Merriman, Senior Lecturer in History and founding member of staff, took place on Tuesday 4th April at Lancaster Priory. On a sunny spring day, the church was filled with family, friends, colleagues and students, from the Acting Vice-Chancellor to current undergraduates. Many of the students and former students had made a special effort to return to Lancaster from their homes during the vacation. Daughter Kate Merriman read the lesson, and appreciations were delivered by daughter Hannah Merriman, colleague Michael Mullett and Jagdish Gundara (one of Marcus's fellow undergraduates at Bowdoin College, Maine in the late 1950s). Colleagues Sandy Grant and Andrew Jotischky were among the pall bearers. The service was followed by an appropriately convivial reception in celebration of Marcus's life. This was held in Pendle College, with which Marcus was long associated and where he last year planted a tree in commemoration of the college's 30th birthday. Marcus was an early supporter of the subtext project, and we are pleased to include a tribute to him below. **** Readers will no doubt have received the message from the Acting Vice-Chancellor regarding the somewhat uncertain future of RAE 2008. Originally, the plan was for RAE 2008 to be 'shadowed' by a metrics-based (rather than a peer-review based) system, with a view to a metrics-based research quality assessment taking over in subsequent years. Following the recent budget statement, however, doubt was cast on whether RAE 2008 would take place at all, it being replaced by the metrics-based approach and Universities have been asked to provide feedback, at very short notice. Consultation appears to have taken place at UMAG and RAE Steering Group level (HoDs have apparently not been consulted), with Lancaster's line being that they strongly support the RAE 2008 exercise, are amenable to a subsequent metrics-based approach and intend to contribute fully to the consultation exercise. Until we know what exactly the metrics-based approach will be, it is difficult to know whether this represents a step forward or not. As many of us know, metrics-based approaches can be fraught with difficulties, and there is a fear here that we may be jumping from the frying pan into the fire. It is to be hoped that in the coming months, consultation processes will be open and thorough. For further rumours on this front, see the 'No Rumours' column, below. **** There are currently vacancies for no less than three College Principalships. It is thought that there are at least two possible candidates for the Furness post, but subtext has yet to hear of any potential candidates for the posts at Fylde and Grizedale. In former times, college principalships were held almost entirely by senior Professors, but these days it is hard enough to find anyone at all for the posts, let alone Professors. Former AUT president, David Smith, has recently taken up the gauntlet to become Principal of County. It is to be hoped that his example may inspire other professors (and indeed other academics) to follow suit. **** As reported in subtext on 21st March, the George Fox 6 were found guilty of aggravated trespass at Preston Crown Court on 17th March. The implications of this both for national civil liberties and how we conduct ourselves at Lancaster will rumble on. In the meanwhile, with costs at £3600, the GF6 are asking supporters to 'sponsor a second'. That, they write, is '... £20 for each second of their three minute peaceful demonstration ...'. For further details contact 180 [at] georgefox6.co.uk. **** John Hughes, Professor of Sociology and Principal of Cartmel, has recently left hospital and is recuperating at home in Preston following an operation. subtext wishes him well and hopes he will be back in his accustomed place in Cartmel before too long. **** Congratulations to Andrew Jotischky and Linda Woodhead on their promotion to personal chairs in the departments of History and Religious Studies respectively. A contributor to subtext and an independent voice on Senate, Professor Woodhead's promotion should send a clear signal that it is possible both to speak one's mind and receive promotion. Potential rebels, take heart. ***************************************************** 3. NO RUMOURS COLUMN Readers will no doubt be aware that our recently honoured Academic Registrar, Marion McClintock, is due to retire this summer. Strangely, however, we have yet to hear of any arrangements for the appointment of her successor. Could this mean that there may not, in fact, be a successor? The post of Academic Registrar is not explicitly provided for in the University Statutes, so it is technically possible for there not to be one. subtext has heard that there are suggestions the post itself might be either downgraded (appoint someone more junior, with parts of her brief being dispersed to other people in U House) or abolished, with responsibilities being diversified. We are aware that for many of us, Marion McClintock is irreplaceable, but is this not taking things a bit far? **** Following on from the RAE 2008 news item above, word has been received that the government offered to cancel RAE 2008 and that research funding would be maintained as before, and with hints that the very considerable amount of money saved on the cancelled RAE could be put into research. It is thought that almost every University decided it wanted another RAE, most imagining that they would do better this time around and so get more of the money. Could this really be the case? Of course, it has been pointed out by some old cynics that VCs love the RAE because it enables them to keep academics on edge. **** subtext had heard a rumour that the university's combined heat and power (CHP) plant is coming to the end of its life and the word is that management thinks it can't afford to replace it. It has also been heard that they have also been trying to save money recently by turning off the heating - this happened a week or so back and there were a lot of complaints. We hope to follow up with an investigative piece in a future issue. ***************************************************** 4. MARCUS MERRIMAN, 1940-2006 Marcus Merriman, the longest-serving member of the university, died in his home on 23 March of a sudden heart attack. Unlike other American expatriates of the 1960s, Marcus was not driven out of the United States by the Vietnam War. As a visiting student he had already fallen in love with Britain, and academic and personal attachments kept him here. His private life, with its passion, joy and tragedy, has been recorded elsewhere. This remembrance focuses on his life in the university. Marcus joined the university at its founding in 1964 as a temporary assistant lecturer in History, taking tutorials for the professor and two lecturers who then constituted the department. This was before the Bailrigg campus was ready, and teaching took place in a former warehouse in St. Leonardsgate. But so thrilled was Marcus at participating in the creation of a new university, and such was his forceful impact, that his appointment was quickly made permanent, to the particular satisfaction of the Vice-Chancellor, Charles Carter. In 1966 the department moved to the muddy building site at Bailrigg, and it was in these early years that I came to know Marcus well. As young bachelors we often ended the day in the pub, initially at the "Cross Keys" (with its irresistible bar billiards table and its admonitory brass plaque "No spitting in the saloon bar"), which too soon was sadly displaced by BHS, though not before Marcus had salvaged a wooden armchair for his study. His new local was the "Ring of Bells," benignly presided over by Arthur and Betty Wild. One sometimes felt that Marcus never met a publican he didn't like. These were before the days of the red woollen cap, and before the small cigars too, Marcus's taste in tobacco then being satisfied by Capstan Full Strength, a ferocious brand now defunct. The university in the 1960s and early 1970s consisted (on the academic staff side) of a small number of professors, mainly in their 40s, and a larger number of lecturers, mainly in their 20s, who all, more or less, knew one another. Responsibilities could come early. At a young age Marcus aspired to be vice-principal of Bowland - the colleges at that point were thought to have equal status with departments - but professorial fears that he was too much of a loose cannon blocked him. Nonetheless in the democratic environment of early Bailrigg there was no keeping such a vital force down. Marcus was elected to the senate as a representative of the non-professorial staff, and was also active in the AUT, becoming the local president. These two offices meant that he could not but be involved when the university entered the era of political turbulence in the early 1970s. Partly the unrest was a consequence of student activism, and students always found in Marcus a willing listener, if one prepared to answer back, and partly it arose from academic disputes. Student and staff issues often became intertwined, and protest meetings, AUT meetings and emergency meetings of senate for a time seemed almost to become a way of life. Marcus's twin responsibilities put him in the thick of this, often in a mediating capacity. The Vice-Chancellor once joked that every senate committee had to contain 'the statutory Merriman.' Marcus enjoyed the action. He was ingenious at finding solutions to delicate problems, largely because he would not let something go until he had sorted it. He inspired widespread affection for the evident good-heartedness with which he championed the cause of others. But in time his central role diminished, partly because of changes in a rapidly-growing university, but also because of his increasing deafness. For such a gregarious man, who revelled in the company of others, this disability was a cruel blow. Eventually he was to abandon attending meetings because he could not hear what was said. But before that he had participated in the establishment of Pendle College, fulfilling one cherished ambition when he became licensee of its bar, with his name posted proudly over the door. He also served for many years as its vice-principal. But his first love was always teaching. Marcus's teaching methods could be literally explosive, as in his gunpowder and cannon experiments illustrating the revolution in early modern warfare. The gruff devotion he gave to his students guaranteed their lasting loyalty. Many academics fully engage only with their more able students, but Marcus's provocative style was designed to challenge students of all intellectual levels, and he was exceptionally generous in his attention to individuals, even as enrolments rose remorselessly. In 1990 his talent was recognised nationally when he won (with two colleagues) the Cadbury-Schweppes National Award for innovation in teaching, and in 1991 the university awarded him a Pilkington prize for outstanding teaching, following testimony from generations of grateful students. Marcus's commitment to teaching and his other enthusiasms meant that publications did not always come swiftly, and, despite his prodigious service to the university, it was not until 1992 that he was promoted to senior lecturer. But when publications did come their scholarship was exemplary, even if the commentary was often charmingly and wittily idiosyncratic. His masterpiece, The Rough Wooings: Mary Queen of Scots, 1542-1551, was published in 2000 and won the Saltire History Book of the Year award for the best book in Scottish history. Marcus's grasp of dynastic history could not be bettered, and his graphic illustrations of its implications make compelling reading even for non-specialists. See, for example, his discussion of 'royal children-making' as a form of 'controlled animal husbandry,' and the related 16th century obsession with the purity of royal mothers (pp.117-18). Marcus was gratified when his 40 years' service to the university was recognised with a presentation, and he was proud too to become its longest-serving member. He had finally determined to retire this summer and at the time of his death was looking forward to the challenges that such a change of life would bring. The History department had decided to honour him with a special farewell dinner on July 4th - Independence Day. Marcus was already preparing his speech for the occasion ... Michael Heale ***************************************************** 5. WELL, WHAT WAS IT LIKE IN THE OLD DAYS? Stanley Henig* Is it no more than nostalgia for things past? There is, of course, a splendid history of the University by Marion McClintock, but hopefully there is also room for personal anecdote and I am glad of the invitation to write this up before I forget it all. I was appointed to the then new University of Lancaster from August 1964 - one of three members of the Department of Politics - Professor Reynolds and Russell Pryce the two others. There were around ten departments in all, mostly with three members of staff. It had already been decreed that all students would take three subjects in their first year and it was anticipated that our new university would have about 300 students in all. So we could expect around 70/80 to take our subject. We had two months to prepare the syllabus and to begin to think about what students continuing with politics might study in years two and three. Please to note that no university today would surely be 'allowed' to recruit students to a degree course without subject modules known and approved in advance. I like to think that our first students were in no way disadvantaged by the inevitably more pragmatic approach. In fact we used the first year to plan programmes in which politics would be the major, the minor subject or the so-called (and compulsory) distant minor. As individual departments grew stronger in later years, they deemed the latter an unnecessary distraction and ultimately killed it off. The new university would be collegiate - initially with just two colleges - Bowland and Lonsdale. There were early battles between departments and colleges. The latter laid a claim to handle admissions, but ultimately this battle was won by the departments. I rather think the 'quid pro quo' (although I did not remain on the staff long enough to see it) was that colleges would be in charge of degree ceremonies. Younger members of staff from academic departments and the administration would socialize together. From our base in St Leonardgate we would sally forth for lunch and sometimes for dinner at one of the local eateries. There were not so many in those days - I recall a couple of local pubs and Lancaster's first Chinese restaurants. Occasionally we went further afield - the height of luxury was a fine steakhouse at Claughton. On another occasion a local family, hearing that there were a large number of unattached young male members of staff, arranged a party at which we could meet unattached young females from the area. Oh happy days! I think it fair to describe the event as an unmitigated social disaster! Departments were grouped into or onto Boards of Study where we could all, and were encouraged to, have our penny's worth and contribute actively to various discussions. I have to confess that I occasionally went rather over the top in some of the controversies. Above all there was a great sense of togetherness along with a passionate commitment to building up what we believed would become a great university. I think there was probably less of a feeling of 'us' and 'them' than in any of the institutions at which I subsequently worked. We all felt that as individuals we could and did make a difference. As a budding politician (soon to take over much of my life) I was invited to be the returning officer for the first ever student union elections. I recall that the principal of one of the colleges was privately concerned about one of the successful candidates. My memory is that the said student fulfilled these expectations when he climbed onto the roof of a leading local factory - Storeys - and removed the flag. Apparently the company had more than one, so they reinstated it. The said student rather unwisely sought to repeat the exercise. He was caught by police lying in wait - there must have been slightly fewer calls on police time in those days - arrested and charged (if memory is correct) with larceny. The judge or magistrate, recalling similar incidents at Oxbridge, dismissed the charge. The very first week of term coincided with the 1964 general election and the return after thirteen years of a Labour government under Harold Wilson. I gave my first lecture in the Grand Theatre (hired by the University at that time) the day after the election. As I had been canvassing all day before and up half the night cheering the results, I was doubtless on sparkling form! Naturally I cannot remember the exact topic or a single word of what I said! Not so many months later Lancaster Labour Party were seeking a candidate for the next election; I 'put my hat in the ring' and was chosen and duly elected in March 1966. I do recall calling on Professor Reynolds after the count to offer my resignation. As it happened another member of staff, the late Gerry Fowler, was also elected: the University passed a rule that anybody elected to Parliament would have a right to return to their job within twelve months. My time in Parliament was rather longer than that, so after I lost the election in 1970 my professional career took me elsewhere. I think though the eighteen months at Lancaster were in many ways the most rewarding part of that career - perhaps the reason why I am particularly pleased to be involved once again with the University albeit in a quite different role. *Stanley Henig was one of the first members of academic staff of the University of Lancaster - in the Department of Politics from 1964-6. He has recently been appointed Deputy Pro Chancellor of the University. ***************************************************** 6. SYNERGY Dedicated readers may recall that in issue 5, we announced a new competition, for which we invited readers to send in to us the most fatuous examples of management speak that you come across. So far, submissions have been thin on the ground (it may be, of course, that management speak is now so ubiquitous that it is scarcely noticed). But in the meantime, we have come across the following game, with which meeting-fatigued academics may wish to revive themselves. 1. Before (or during) your next meeting, seminar, or conference call, prepare yourself by drawing a square. I find that 5" x 5" is a good size. Divide the card into columns-five across and five down. That will give you 25 one-inch blocks. 2. Write one of the following words/phrases in each block: 3. Check off the appropriate block when you hear one of those words/phrases. 4. When you get five blocks horizontally, vertically, or diagonally, stand up and shout "SYNERGY!" ***************************************************** 7. LETTERS Once again, the powers-that-be, i.e. the Budget Review Group have, in typical knee-jerk style, cut a swathe through all Departmental Budgets following the disastrous news that student enquiries and consequent enrolments for 2006/7 are, and will be down on previous years due to the new fee structures introduced. Do these people relish inflicting chaos upon Departments in such cavalier style? The word on the grapevine now is that Staff Development and training is to be severely curtailed from August 2006 with the consequent loss of jobs. All this in the light of job evaluation and a new pay structure means that once again, our corporate and forward thinking senior management teams have created a rod for their own backs. After all, what's going to happen to all those people who will have immediate training needs in order to meet the revised job descriptions following the job evaluation exercise?... Externally provided training perhaps?... At vastly inflated prices that will eat into the already-tight departmental budgets and for the select few too no doubt... Names in the hat once again we presume? Is there anyone among the Senior Officers in University House willing to stand up for and openly support, through this hallowed journal, Personnel Services and the Staff Development Team? Or is everything that was printed in the Staff Charter regarding staff development merely there to placate the dissident voices that were raised in the Staff Survey? After all, the University is now developing an international reputation for the control of freedom of speech, so why change? Or is this just cynicism of the worst kind?? The University wishes to be seen as a respected corporate entity in higher education circles, so why are they constantly "reacting" to the needs of staff and students, rather than being "proactive"? We have one of the most highly respected Management Development programmes in the world, students come here from the four corners of the globe to be educated in the ways of leading-edge Management Theories and Business Practice, yet the University in all its infinite wisdom fails to use its knowledge base effectively... A case of do as I say, not as I do??? I won't hold my breath waiting to hear the Senior Officers' voices as one in harmony... Signed, Ian Thornton **** The development of the Students' Union into what is best described as a finance, management and advertising training centre, incidentally reflecting the backgrounds of some of its paid key staff members, seems to be cracking on at unfettered pace. In its recent newsletter, called LoserTalk (or something like that) members of the university are encouraged to root not for their own, but for the importance of being Ernst & Young, it reads: "Ernst & Young Roses 2006 Ernst and Young ROSES 2006 is here: Plan your study so that you can come and take part or support our sport teams compete in the one of the best inter varsity competitions around in the UK. Lancaster take on York University for the Carter James Trophy over the weekend of the 5th, 6th and 7th of May. Be there to watch it happen. If you can't for whatever reason then go to LUSU homepage www.lusu.co.uk for a live scoreboard and match reports or listen in to Bailrigg FM. Get behind Lancaster." Does that entail getting behind Ernst & Young, then? I am with York in that case!! Signed, Martin Pedersen **** A company called Centros Miller are currently developing plans for the area between Stonewell and the canal - ie the Leonardsgate car park, Mitchell's brewery, and the areas around the Duke's and the rand (see http://www.castle-view.info/ for information from developers, and http://www.lancasterukonline.net/ for some local comments). A local group, It's Our City, are working to try and ensure that these plans properly represent what the people of Lancaster (and others who care) would like to see on the site. An earlier consensus around developing the area as a 'cultural quarter' has largely been ignored. Current proposals are for more shops (high street names, not small locals), a department store, a multi-storey car park, a hotel, a small area of housing and a very small green space. Stonewell and Mitchell's would be demolished. The traffic implications remain unresolved. Anyone who wishes to get involved in It's Our City is very welcome - contact me (by email) in the first instance. Alternatively, or as well, letters to local press and local councillors are well worth writing. And is there anyone out there who understands financial projections especially in relation to shopping and retail space? LCC have a report which, amongst other things, suggests that another supermarket is required, and we would very much appreciate some assistance in understanding the reasoning, premises and data on which the arguments for expanding retail provision are likely to be based. Again, please contact me if you could spare an hour or so to help us make sense of this. Many thanks, Jane Hunt (j.hunt [at] lancaster.ac.uk). **** Dear all, I wanted to bring these articles from Anthropology in Action on audit culture and the politics of accountability to the attention of readers of subtext. Many of the issues raised in these articles will, I think, resonate with recent and ongoing events in the university. Please see the link http://www.angelfire.com/rpg/anthropologyinaction/aaa_articles.htm. Best wishes, Nayanika Mookherjee **** Dear all, It is great to come back from sick leave and see subtext! It cheers me up about being at LU again. Congratulations to you all for your good work. All best Rosemary Betterton ************************************************************ The editorial collective of subtext currently consists (in alphabetical order) of: Lenny Baer, Steve Fleetwood, George Green, Patrick Hagopian, Gavin Hyman, John Law, Maggie Mort, Rhona O'Brien, Ian Reader and Bronislaw Szerszynski. |