As the problems we collectively face grow in size, complexity, and urgency, transformation is now the name of the game. Perhaps, then indicative of the zeitgeist, it was also the theme of the EASST-4S Conference, hosted by the department where I work, the Athena Institute at the Vrije Universiteit. After the event was over and the dust had settled, after the whirlwind of volunteers, coordinators and guests milling around the campus and our corridors, after all the pots and pans and improvised cookware from the “Food Waste” workshop were scrubbed and returned to their respective owners, after new and old friends and colleagues returned home, life at Athena returned to its normal level of busyness. Given the opportunity with this special issue, however, we thought it valuable to think back on what was, for us and for our institute, a remarkable happening. “Making and Doing Transformations” was a vast and varied showcase of future-oriented scholarship, yet some of us were still left with some questions. Where does transformation really happen? What needs to be transformed? How should we, as academics, go about it? And, most importantly, where are we supposed to find the time?
I could only attend a very small number of panels, so I decided to talk to some of our colleagues at Athena about whether, where, and how they might have experienced “transformations,” both in and after the event. The following is based on an informal conversation with Teun Zuiderent-Jerak, Co-chair of the program committee, and coffee-corner encounters with a few close colleagues (mostly fellow PhDs) who were to varying extents involved in preparing and running the conference. Interwoven throughout are my own, very partial perspectives of a starting PhD student working on transdisciplinary boundary-crossing – constantly prodding at the edges.
“Trans-formats”
“Making and Doing Transformations” was truly a mega-event, gathering over three thousand attendees, including organizers, volunteers, speakers, panelists, and guests. When some of us at the department (me especially, I will admit) first heard of the number of accepted panels, we were highly skeptical (to put it mildly), envisioning the worst scenarios of confusion, entropy, and frustration. Yet it all, somehow, worked: chapeau to the organizing team, NomadIT, and of course all the support staff and volunteers – too many to be named, and each too valuable to mention a selection. One colleague noted how the conference having its own currency for food and drinks made it its own country, in a way – and the sheer size of it further served to create this feeling of, indeed, almost being on a different continent for a few days.
As suggested by Teun, the inclusivity of the program was not new to EASST-4S, which has long upheld the mission to embrace contributions from all career stages; this gives the opportunity especially to so many PhD students – who often carry the brunt of the academic labor, yet (are made to) feel so insecure about the value of their perspectives – to share their work, questions, and ideas. It is a sign, recurring in each edition, that the torch is ready to be passed on to the next generation, in a way; and a recognition that this generation – like each generation before – demands change.
Undeniably, the massive number of fascinating panels meant that everyone had to make tough choices of when and where to be; leaving one session early, often, to make it to another vitally important panel, or arriving late from one; and hearing over and over the inevitable refrain, “unfortunately we are out of time”, which so often suspends the discussion right as it is, finally (I feel), getting to the core of whichever question the panel hoped to address. We could of course continue thinking together over coffees and lunches, and after the panels, in the (exceptionally sunny) streets and canals of Amsterdam, but this time there was something new.
The organizers wisely crafted “other spaces” for picking up all the interrupted and new conversations. The “Making and Doing” at the heart of the conference encouraged alternative formats to traditional paper presentations, to connect with peers horizontally and through all the senses, to convey meanings, and meaningful concerns across backgrounds, expertise, tools and ingredients (literally and figuratively). Then, of course, there was the Forest Festival on Thursday. Never did I imagine that I would be at a full-scale festival attended almost entirely by academics. There I had the chance to shake hands, clink glasses, and share ideas with some of the speakers who had sparked my curiosity, and the informal setting created a much-needed space to air out both inspirations and doubts. Sadly, I missed the mosh pit that occurred later in the evening – I hope I’ll have the chance to experience that someday still.
Opening the discussion…
Another innovation was that there was significantly more space for the personal – for honesty, and, at times, even vulnerability: another conscious move away from the expectations of formality and composure which have for so long hung over young aspiring scholars’ heads. The open reflection on mechanisms of and against academic bullying and silencing (#MeTooSTS/#WeDoSTS) pushed the boundaries of “normal” academic conversation further still. The “black box” of the rules of academic engagement has undeniably been opened, and light is beginning to shine in. The problem of time, however, persists: we barely have time to peer in, acknowledge the problem, and move on to the next thing.
On that note, there were some other, more subtle limits, most evident for someone like me, as already announced at the start, with a proverbial bone to pick. Decolonial and feminist voices (to me, to us, the most staunchly transformative impulses in science) still feel too marginal, as witnessed, in my (again, limited) perception, in the relatively few, somewhat awkwardly scheduled panels. A simple search of the full program (including both panels and papers) on the conference website shows 66 results for “feminis[t/m]”, 52 for “[de/post]coloni[al/iz*]”, versus 682 for “AI” (a few of the latter did include feminist and decolonial perspectives, though) (EASST-4S, 2024). I had to fight the “mild flu” that was doing the rounds in the crowd to be on campus at 08:30 on Thursday and Friday, to join the conversations closest to my heart (and was impressed by the numerous attendance, in spite of the early hour). I was peeved that I would miss the Bernal Lecture, in order to be at the (absolutely inspiring and motivating) “Asking Different Questions” workshop by Sarah McCullough. (Luckily the Bernal Lecture in 2024 was recorded and uploaded to YouTube, as are some instances of McCullough’s workshop on FRI UC Davis channel.) While galvanized by the knowledge that there are others out there who feel the same, I continue to dream of when the conversations that matter so much to us will get to occupy a more central stage: when we will be able to take the time to “stay with the troubles,” as Haraway (2016) envisioned.
Then there was the final Friday afternoon’s “Whac-a-Mole” game with student protests across the university buildings, where I witnessed with (exhausted) dismay the irritation of many of my peers for not being able to reach their panels on time. Disrupt they most certainly did, and my pointing out this achievement, as we were stuck together, powerless, in front of locked and guarded entrances, was met, each time, with a grimace of recognition. I leave to others, hopefully, to report on the debates that were sparked by the event. What stayed with me was the question: which transformations are really allowed to fit into the academic conversation? While we run our big and little races, real wars, injustices, and lawlessness continue to boil and brew in “the real world”, driving forward their own, destructive transformations, and I feel we would do well to pay more attention to this – to make clear, for ourselves, and for the world around us, what we want to transform from, against, and towards. And for this, I personally think, we need more time.
References
EASST-4S (2024). Program. [Online]. EASST-4S. Available at: https://www.easst4s2024.net/programme/#timetable [accessed 15/11/2024].
Haraway, D.J. (2016). Staying with the trouble: making kin in the Chthulucene. Durham: Duke University Press.
NomadIT (2024). EASST-4S. The Bernal Prize Lecture. Available at:
[accessed 15/11/2024].
FRI UC Davis (2020). Asking Different Questions. [Video]. Available at:
[accessed 15/11/2024].
Author biography
Esther Blokbergen is a 2nd year PhD student at the Athena Institute of the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, working on problems of transdisciplinary boundary-crossing from a decolonial feminist perspective. She completed her BA, MA and MSc at the University of Amsterdam in European and East-European studies and Social Sciences. She has lived, studied, worked, and researched in South Korea, Italy, USA, Russia, Switzerland and Kazakhstan, before settling back in Amsterdam to focus on transformation “at home.”
Home page: https://research.vu.nl/en/persons/esther-blokbergen
