To classicists who fondly recall the comfortable old Transactions of decades past, changes instituted under recent editors have surely come as quite a surprise. Although the familiar maroon binding of the journal is the same, both format and content are radically different. Desktop publishing has encouraged experimentation with fonts and spacing so as to produce a camera-ready text more appealing to the eye. In place of the idiosyncratic "TAPA style" of scholarly annotation, contributors are now encouraged to apply conventions found in W. S. Achtert and J. Gibaldi, The MLA Style Manual (New York 1985). The preceding year's Presidential Address has become a regular feature of the annual volume. Contributions are currently grouped by subject matter; articles originating as presentations in a single panel may be published together; and a new section, Paragraphoi, welcomes responses to essays in previous volumes and brief discussions of disciplinary matters. These changes, begun under Ruth Scodel and fully realized under the outgoing editor, Sander M. Goldberg, have, in my view, made TAPA much more readable, more responsive to professional concerns, and--dare I say it?--more controversial. Good thing, too. In certain other academic areas, "flagship" journals sponsored by national associations and charged with showcasing representative work have the reputation of being deadly dull. TAPA is not.
Conscious of what I owe to my predecessors in office, I believe my first priority is to sustain the momentum they generated. At the same time, I intend to maintain the established virtues of TAPA. On his appointment in 1990, Professor Goldberg noted that the journal is held in high esteem for its scrupulous attention to editorial courtesy, professional efficiency, and inclusivity, along with its rigorous standards of quality and accuracy. That is a tradition to which I can take great pride in adhering. In particular, I will continue Professor Goldberg's commitment to making editorial review procedures quicker and simpler. Prospective contributors are urged to provide an e-mail address and fax number when submitting essays; in my editorial correspondence, I will resort to electronic communication whenever appropriate. Given current workload pressures on faculty, especially on untenured members of the profession, every effort must be made to ensure timely and constructive evaluation of manuscripts and swift editorial decisions. I will try to set fair and reasonable deadlines and ask, in return, only that referees and contributors do their best to meet them. Finally, provision of a diskette along with hard copy of an accepted manuscript in final form will facilitate proofing. Still, I apologize in advance for snafus to come as I inch apprehensively into the foreign world of desktop publishing. Advice from those experienced in this area will be very welcome. With your patience and help, the learning curve may be steep but short.
As the flagship publication of the American Philological Association, TAPA must go on reflecting the great range of research undertaken by classicists on the North American continent. It is true that my own scholarly interests, at least in recent years, have inclined toward the kind of work some colleagues consider "progressive," others "trendy." I confess to a keen preoccupation with theory, including feminist theory, and with issues of gender and sexuality in antiquity. Yet I also believe that theoretical insights, to be plausible, must be grounded on sound philology and that illuminating philological investigation requires an informed awareness of underlying theoretical postulates. The "or" of "empiricism or hermeneutics?" sets up a false dichotomy; one simply can't exist without the other. Consequently, TAPA will continue to welcome contributions across the spectrum from "mainstream" to "innovative," utilizing all manner of approaches and methodologies; here, the one criterion for acceptability will be the proper application of the method in question. I encourage submissions on the widest possible array of topics, although very abstruse discussions might find a better home in a specialized periodical. Effective presentation of an idea includes the capacity to arouse curiosity and intellectual excitement among readers with little or no prior knowledge of the point at issue. The readership of TAPA is, first and foremost, the general classicist: and, outside our own enclaves, we are all generalists.
Conventions of the genre dictate that editorial proclamations end with an admission of biases. Here are mine:
1. I prefer step-by-step linear exposition to paratactic and digressive argumentation or dazzling intuitive leaps. In a specific case, I'm willing to listen to referees who think otherwise.
2. Drafts submitted for external review should be in finished form, with references fully supplied and checked for accuracy, along with grammar and spelling. The job of a referee is to weigh conceptualization, argumentation, and control of the scholarly apparatus, not to do basic proofreading or give a crash course in English composition.
3. As a theoretician, I will defend the use of abstract terminology to pin down a concept. It has been my experience, though, that the most compelling and provocative scholarly discussions, those that forced me to rethink my assumptions, were always framed in straightforward, engaging prose. Many referees have an absolute horror of jargon.
4. On the other hand, a little wit, judiciously inserted, brightens everyone's day.
See also Guidelines for Contributors. Contributions (in hardcopy triplicate with name on a separate sheet) should be sent to the new editor at the Department of Classics, ML 371, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721. Inquiries by e-mail to mskinner@U.Arizona.EDU and by fax to (520) 621-3678 (department office). Those who prefer old-fashioned voice communication can telephone (520) 621-7418 (department office).
(This editorial statement was originally published in the APA Newsletter 18.5 (October 1995), pp. 1-2.