FROM THE EDITOR

With issue No 1/2013, this journal changed in several respects. Under a new editor-in-chief, the Strategic Review for Southern Africa, then published for 35 years, turned into an open access journal with a redesigned look. But the makeoveraimed at more than merely cosmetic changes. As outlined in the introduction of that issue, the changing context both in South Africa as well as globally, motivated a conceptual re-positioning, that also modified the subject-related thematic framework1). Since then, thanks to many contributors offering a wide range of topicalanalyses, we hopefully managed to live up to at least some of the expectations created. After five years, it is now time to hand editorial responsibility to a new generation of scholars groomed in the spirit of democratic South Africa. This, therefore, is the last issue for me as the editor-in-chief. While I welcomed the privilege to lead the journal towards implementing a modified agenda, I now welcome the opportunity to move out of the way and pursue other tasks. I thank all those in the editorial group and the advisory board who accompanied and supported me during the last years. I am especially grateful to Maxi Schoeman, who felt I would be the right choice for this task. Special thanks go also to Wilma Martin, without her assistance none of the last eleven issues would have become a reality.

Briefer Mentions and Lyrical Lexicons: Marianne Moore’s Responses to Dictionaries in The Dial and Observations

1925 was an important year for the poet and editor Marianne Moore. First, she began assuming editorial responsibility for the American literary magazine The Dial, taking over from her predecessor Scofield Thayer. Second, she saw her collection Observations published, with the first edition selling out within a month. Moore’s interest in dictionaries at this time displays some intriguing overlaps between her critical and creative lives, still an underexplored area within Moore studies. Therefore, this chapter discusses Moore’s early reviews of a range of reference works, before turning its attention to Moore’s poems ‘Injudicious Gardening’ and ‘Marriage’, to demonstrate how Moore’s preoccupation with questions of definition becomes altogether more subversive, and revealing of her capricious attitude towards the notion of ‘definition’ itself.

Demetrio Ducas y la edición de los Erotemata Chrysolorae (1514), entre Venecia y Alcalá de Henares = Demetrius Ducas and the Erotemata Chrysolorae edition (1514), between Venice and Alcalá de Henares

Resumen: En el primer libro enteramente en griego publicado por Demetrio Ducas cuando era profesor en la Universidad de Alcalá de Henares (Erotemata Chrysolorae, 1514), hay una sección gnomológica que coincide con la versión planudeana de las Menandri Sententiae. En este artículo se procede a la colación del texto de la sección gnomológica con el del modelo Aldino (1512), planteando en ambos casos la responsabilidad editorial del propio Ducas. En la segunda parte del artículo se examina la fortuna del primer manual de gramática griega impreso en España a través de las notas de propiedad y apuntes de algunos ejemplares conservados en la Biblioteca Nacional de España.Palabras clave: Demetrio Ducas, Erotemata Chrysolorae, Diego Hurtado de Mendoza, Cardenal Cisneros, Aldo Manuzio, Menandri sententiae, literatura gnomológica.Abstract: In the first Greek book published by Demetrios Ducas when he was professor at the University of Alcalá de Henares (Erotemata Chrysolorae, 1514), there is a gnomological section that coincides with the Planudean version of the Menandri Sententiae. In this article we proceed to the collation of the gnomological section with the text of the editio Aldina (1512), proposing in both cases the editorial responsibility of Ducas. In the second part of the article the fortune of the first Greek grammar manual printed in Spain is examined, thanks to the ownership notes of some copies from the Biblioteca Nacional in Madrid.Keywords: Demetrios Ducas, Erotemata Chrysolorae, Diego Hurtado de Mendoza, Cardinal Ximenes, Aldus Manutius, Menandri sententiae, gnomological literatura.

The BBC: A Radical Rethink

This chapter considers the proposed changes to the BBC's governance and a system of appointments that threaten to encroach on the BBC's editorial autonomy. What is particularly striking about this development is that it pushes in the general direction of growing state control of public service media. The BBC White Paper for Charter Renewal proposed a new ‘unitary board’ of which the majority and most senior members would be appointed by government. For the first time in its history, such an approach threatened to give a direct government appointee overall editorial responsibility for all of the BBC's output. What is equally striking about this move is that it flies in the face of what the government has long intimated was at the heart of its charter renewal agenda: to introduce a system of contestable funding to effectively break up the BBC and enable more local and commercial providers to take a slice of the licence fee.

THE ROYAL SOCIETY AND THE PREHISTORY OF PEER REVIEW, 1665–1965

Despite being coined only in the early 1970s, ‘peer review’ has become a powerful rhetorical concept in modern academic discourse, tasked with ensuring the reliability and reputation of scholarly research. Its origins have commonly been dated to the foundation of the Philosophical Transactions in 1665, or to early learned societies more generally, with little consideration of the intervening historical development. It is clear from our analysis of the Royal Society's editorial practices from the seventeenth to the twentieth centuries that the function of refereeing, and the social and intellectual meaning associated with scholarly publication, has historically been quite different from the function and meaning now associated with peer review. Refereeing emerged as part of the social practices associated with arranging the meetings and publications of gentlemanly learned societies in the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Such societies had particular needs for processes that, at various times, could create collective editorial responsibility, protect institutional finances, and guard the award of prestige. The mismatch between that context and the world of modern, professional, international science, helps to explain some of the accusations now being levelled against peer review as not being ‘fit for purpose’.

Information Literacy and Instruction: How Can This Column Help You?

In recent years, Reference and User Services Quarterly’s “Information Literacy and Instruction” column has covered diverse topics related to information literacy, including MOOCs, universal design, discovery layers, and, of course, assessment. This column has provided a space for librarians from all types of libraries to share how they are engaging with information literacy and instruction in their libraries, as well as to unpack the challenges they faced. As new editors, we will continue to use this space as an opportunity to explore emerging topics in information literacy.As co-editors of “Information Literacy and Instruction,” we bring our own perspectives and experiences to RUSQ, along with some overlapping interests. To better reflect our perspectives, we will alternate editorial responsibility for pieces published in this column, although both editors will be providing feedback. Following is biographical information about each of us, as well as a lengthier description of our column interests.