It is fairly commonly known, in certain circles, that open access comes in different “flavours”. Besides the well-known adage of Richard Stallman that there are multiple types of freedom that can be divided into gratis and libre (“free” as in “beer” as opposed to “free” as in “speech”), the ways in which we provide access to material that is free in either sense are also plural. This piece, consisting of two parts, will give the historical backdrop to “gold”, “green” and the lesser known “platinum” models but also frame these routes to access in the light of a failed utopian project that has been undermined by credentialist models of assessment. While May 1968, another utopian failure, gave us slogans of hope – “Under the paving stones, the beach!” – with open access publishing it seems the chances of finding our way back are growing slimmer, even if some hints of sand and surf shine through in the remaining admirable aspects of the system. The first portion of this piece will appraise the current taxonomies of open access arguing that “platinum” is a form of category error; a misplaced term that nonetheless signals current dissatisfaction. The second section here will think, practically, on the question of ?what is to be done?? In this second part, with reference (ironically, given the pragmatism deployed) to Adorno’s theorizations of utopia, I will critique the conclusions of the UK’s Finch Report as a document that neglects critical thinking, but one whose outcome may be dissent on a wide enough scale to trigger academic disobedience and revolt against the current publication system. From this I will lay out the three criteria that I believe are necessary for a transition away from “Article Processing Charge”-driven publication practices and the infrastructures that should be in place to capitalize on this dissatisfaction, including a modified Public Library of Science-type model.
This white paper outlines a model for open access (OA) publishing for the humanities and social sciences (HSS) that offers a scalable, fair, responsive, and discipline-independent solution that can be applied to the entire scholarly communication ecosystem in an incremental fashion, rolled out at both small and large scale. The solution proposed here is one that encourages partnerships among scholarly societies, research libraries, and other institutional partners (e.g., collaborative e-archives and university presses) who share a common mission to support the creation and distribution of research and scholarship to improve society and to help solve the world’s most challenging problems. Our proposal includes a plan to convert traditional subscription publication formats, including society-published journals and books or monographs, to OA; however, our ultimate goal is to present an approach to funding infrastructure for scholarly communication that is fair and open and fully supports new and evolving forms of research output.
Medieval Iberian Literature and Culture Sephardic Studies Open Access Publishing
Scholarly Communication, Libraries, Digital Publishing, Digital Humanities, Open Access
Poetry and poetics
Nineteenth-century U.S. literature and culture
Academic publishing and Open Access
Dogs named Squirrel
This panel was designed to address the convention’s featured issues of the academic profession, publishing & editing, open access, and new technologies. Using a roundtable format, the panel discussed how open access publications are transforming the kind of research that is possible and necessitating new editorial practices. The session hosted an informed discussion with the audience about the current changes in scholarly publishing and the opportunities, as well as challenges, that open access brings to literary scholarship in the 21st century.
As many of you know, nominations for the Modern Language Association Executive Council are anonymous, so I was honored to be asked to run as one of the graduate student candidates. The current council told me that my nomination was accepted based on my status as a graduate student, my experience as a part-time faculty […]
If you work in a university, you are almost certain to have heard the term ‘open access’ in the past couple of years. You may also have heard either that it is the utopian answer to all the problems of research dissemination or perhaps that it marks the beginning of an apocalyptic new era of ‘pay-to-say’ publishing. In this book, Martin Paul Eve sets out the histories, contexts and controversies for open access, specifically in the humanities. Broaching practical elements alongside economic histories, open licensing, monographs and funder policies, this book is a must-read for both those new to ideas about open-access scholarly communications and those with an already keen interest in the latest developments for the humanities. This title is also available as open access via Cambridge Books Online.
Martin Paul Eve is Professor of Literature, Technology and Publishing at Birkbeck, University of London. Previously he was a Lecturer in English at the University of Lincoln, UK and an Associate Tutor/Lecturer at the University of Sussex, where he completed his Ph.D. Martin specialises in contemporary American fiction (primarily the works of Thomas Pynchon, Don DeLillo and David Foster Wallace), histories and philosophies of technology, and technological mutations in scholarly publishing. He is the author of four books, Pynchon and Philosophy: Wittgenstein, Foucault and Adorno (Palgrave Macmillan, 2014: 9781137405494), Open Access and the Humanities: Contexts, Controversies and the Future (Cambridge University Press, 2014: 9781107484016), Password (Bloomsbury Academic, 2016: 9781501314872), and Literature Against Criticism: University English & Contemporary Fiction in Conflict (Open Book Publishers, 2016: 9781783742738). From 2015-2020, Martin is a member of the UK English Association’s Higher Education committee. In addition, Martin is well-known for his work on open access and HE policy, appearing before the UK House of Commons Select Committee BIS Inquiry into Open Access, writing for the British Academy Policy Series on the topic, being a steering-group member of the OAPEN-UK project, the Jisc National Monograph Strategy Group, the SCONUL Strategy Group on Academic Content and Communications, the Open Knowledge Foundation’s Open Access Steering Group, the Jisc Scholarly Communications Advisory Group, the Collaborative Knowledge Foundation advisory board, the California Digital Library/University of California Press’s Humanities Book Infrastructure advisory board, and the HEFCE Open Access Monographs Expert Reference Panel (2014) and founding the Open Library of Humanities.
Officially launched just over a year ago, the Open Access Network (OAN) offers a transformative, sustainable, and scalable model of open access (OA) publishing and preservation that encourages partnerships among scholarly societies, research libraries, and other partners (e.g., academic publishers, university presses, collaborative e-archives) who share a common mission to support the creation and distribution of open research and scholarship and to encourage more affordable education, which can be a direct outcome of OA publishing. Our ultimate goal is to develop a collective funding approach that is fair and open and that fully sustains the infrastructure needed to support the full life-cycle for communication of the scholarly record, including new and evolving forms of research output. Simply put, we intend to Make Knowledge Public.