Search

Main argument, narrative, or effect The author explores the concept of the book as a product of academic knowledge and the main mode of scholarly communication. The author explains that academic books are “developed into both a product and value-laden object of knowledge exchange within academia” (p. 2). The author emphasizes the need for alternative models which will increase equitable access to books and will challenge the nature of books as finite material “products of scholarly communications” (p.

Open scholarship, open access, openness, open science, radical open access, open politics.

The call for a scholarly poethics sounds to me like a call for making a record of our scholarly relations just as we would make a record of our scholarly edits. A focus on relations asks us to defocus around static boundaries of book-object and scholar-individual to instead collect and organize data differently.

I use the same preface in both of these annotations - please correct me if my understanding and internalization of the article is not representative of the author’s intentions. How I apply this article to the theory and practice of archive ethnography is once again through intentionality of the researcher. It makes practical sense to consider a contemporary digital platform to publish findings and archive data.

I will preface this by saying that I struggled with this article because I found it to be abstract - dealing with broad ideas such as accessibility, neoliberalism, critical spaces, intellectual freedom, the intellectual public, trust, vulnerability, governance, and empowerment. It takes me repetition and being in conversation with others about the components in order for me to fully grasp the ideas.

In this chapter, Janneke explores recently developed alternatives to academic publishing as it is presently structured. Some of these alternatives are focused on increasing equitable access and raising questions about the “material nature of books, authorship, copyright, originality, responsibility, and fixity” (159). Janneke approaches these alternatives as part of their strategy of experimenting with and re-imagining the future of the scholarly book.

"A scholarly poethics, conceptualized as such, would include forms of oppenness that do not either simply repeat established forms (such as the closed print-based book, single authorship, linear thought, copyright, exploitative publishing relationships) or succumb to the closures that its own implementation (e.g., through commerical adaptations) and institutionalization (e.g.

Janneke Adema's chapter on challenges of, and experiments in radical openness (defined by her as "practices and theories of radical open access are critical of openness in its neoliberal guises, but still try to engage with the open in an affirmative way too” p.

The author reevaluates the concept of “openness” and the ways scholars can arrive at different different definitions and uses of it in terms of sharing their work and the alternative means it can produce to challenge the neoliberal norms dominating universities, the publishing industry, and academia in general.

• What concepts, ideas and examples from this text contribute to the theory and practice of archive ethnography?