Odour of Chrysanthemums Online access to a short story by D H Lawrence Group for Literary Archives and Manuscripts Manchester 26 March 2010 Dorothy Johnston Manuscripts and Special Collections

Introduction Digital access at Nottingham: Background The Odour project: Initial pros and cons Principal features What was achieved Questions and Lessons

Digital access at Nottingham  The holdings  Manuscripts and Archives  Special Collections (Rare Books)  East Midlands Collection (local studies)  Operation within converged services  Benefits of digital infrastructure  Close links with e-learning  Early digitisation developments  Project based  Supported e-learning or awareness raising  Focus on contextual added value, not images.

Awareness raising 1. Online exhibitions

Awareness raising 2. Spotlight on the Collections gallery

Awareness raising: 3. Collection resource pages

e-learning: Skills for Users

e-learning: Academic Partners

e-learning: Teaching Packs

Lawrence project: Background  Digital access to Lawrence regularly sought.  Unsuccessful project bid (2000) plan provided a potential model and clarified objectives.  Examined in “Issues in delivering primary source materials over the internet as resources for research and learning in the humanities” (E. Archer, MA thesis, University of Nottingham, 2004).  English Subject Centre funding to Sean Matthews to deliver the text with supporting pedagogic materials for textual, historical and critical study (2005).

D H Lawrence, Odour of Chrysanthemums

Supporting factors  Good subject for academic/curatorial collaboration  Popular short story - widely taught, ‘canonical’ text  Original sources, both for text and background  Accessible textual history through critical materials  Relevant to local and regional community identity  Potential for outreach and local schools based learning  D H Lawrence digitisation a long-term objective  Proven delivery of e-learning by the team.

Potential issues  Copyright in text and other IPR issues  Lack of technical or curatorial input to bid for funding  Project management  Capacity for technical delivery  Capacity to research images, contextual enrichment  Fitting academic drivers and timetables into curatorial operational pressures and existing projects NB: Other current activities included move of service to new accommodation.

Development of Odour project: Principal anticipated features  Aimed at both research and educational audience  Deliver reading texts  Guided comparison of texts, with notes  Critical literature about Odour  Background original material – letters  Background secondary material – e.g. local context  Images – photographs etc.  School lesson plans

e-learning: texts in transmission

The sources

Corrected proofs

Comparing different versions

Uncorrected proofs (1910) first publication (1911)

First publication (1911) First collected edition (1914)

Work with the texts: dialect

Project elements delivered  Reading texts  Guided comparison of texts, with notes  Working with the texts – for students  Critical literature about Odour  Further materials – e.g. map, photographs, article on “Talking Lawrence”

Elements deferred Further potential elements but project creep resisted.  Application of guided reading to all episodes  Supporting original material from other parts of the collection – e.g. letters  Local studies content – other than dialect  Significantly greater quantity of images  Focused school lesson plans in collaboration with specific school / teachers  Aud io content: reading Lawrence

Supporting future similar projects  Does it fit the digital strategy and plans?  Who’s funding? And what is funded?  Who’s managing?  Does academic partner have dedicated time?  Use proven methodologies or new developments?  Timescales suiting curators, academics and developers?  Complexities of IPR?  Is it sustainable and extensible?

Opportunities and constraints  Tension between strategic digitisation plans and academic project opportunities  New models of partnership are required  Pilot projects need to deliver generic solutions  Curators may aim to extend the brief and develop the resource further  Audience focus (student/public etc.) may shift.  If digital texts become surrogate collections, responsibility lies with curators. 

D H Lawrence Odour of Chyrsanthemums at the University of Nottingham Manuscripts and Special Collections