(k/K)airos
KH:
You have discussed the fitness of certain articles and of the broader conception of the journal to kairos. To continue to thread connections between kairos as a concept and Kairos the journal, it would be interesting to touch upon the issue facing Kairos at this current time when electronic and print publication are in tension with each other. How do you see this online journal's use and title of Kairos meeting scholarly publishing on kairos as a rhetorical concept?

PS:
The title of the journal begs the question of the connection to the ancient tradition. I would be very interested in reading an essay in Kairos that defines the term in its rich tapestry of nuance and discusses how such a general concept becomes an informing principle of the journal. I take this to be the case, but I would like to see it appear in full flourish. The connections need to be made explicit, I believe.

PS:
James L. Kinneavy made an interesting statement when your journal came out. Kinneavy probably knew more about kairos than any one in America at the time. Kinneavy became interested kairos in the 1950s as a graduate student under the direction of Craig La Driere at Catholic University. La Driere had worked on the Greek concept of prepon and through his influence Kinneavy became interested in the relationship among prepon, kairos and decorum (a dominant concept in Roman rhetoric). When the journal Kairos was launched, Kinneavy said to me, "The editors have chosen a major concept for the identity and theme of the journal. I hope that the journal lives up to its name." Kinneavy went on to express an interest in whether the journal would be historically based and if that base would be kairos as an historical term and concept. I do not recall any later comments from him on the journal. As you may know, he passed away in August of 1999.

KH:
Do you see the online aspect of the journal influencing the way kairos works as a concept in this venue?

PS:
The issue of the online nature of kairos raises an interesting issue. The immediacy of the journal is clearly a time issue, but I see it as more one of chronology rather than temporal accessibility. We access the journal in a more immediate way, if we desire, but I'm not sure that this temporal accessibility is related to kairos. I believe that it is more properly a chronological issue. (I might add that the relationship between kairos and chronos is one that has yet to be rigorously explored.)

Top