Dear Per,
Thank you for your comments (and nice words about my chapter).
No, IMS Affect is not dedicated to cognitive approaches to affect only, and other perspectives are most welcome in the research cluster. The cognitive focus was for
this particular seminar, and future seminars will explore other strategies and methodologies to deal with media and affect.
And thank you all for a very productive and engaging discussion yesterday.
Cheers Niklas
Dr. Niklas Salmose
Professor of Literatures in English
Vice Chair Department of Languages
Co-Coordinator Graduate School
MIDWorld
Linneaus
University Center for Intermedial and Multimodal Studies
Topic Editor:
Text
Matters.
Board Member,
F.
Scott Fitzgerald Society
https://lnu.se/en/staff/niklas.salmose/
Zoom room:
https://lnu-se.zoom.us/j/6056421996
Linnaeus University, Sweden
Latest Publications:
Salmose, N., M. Pennacchia & G Golinelli (eds.) (2025).
The Voices of Water: Intermedial Blue Eco-Stories.
Textus: English Studies in Italy, 2.
Salmose, N. (2025). ”A Darker Shade of Green:
The Great Gatsby and Fossil Fuel Capital.” The Bloomsbury Handbook to F. Scott Fitzgerald. Bloomsbury Academic.
Salmose,
N., Rennie, D. (2024). F.
Scott Fitzgerald: A Composite Biography. Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press. 448.
Bruhn, Jørgen & Niklas Salmose.
Intermedial Ecocriticism: The Climate Crisis Through Art and Media (Rowman & Littlefield, 2024).
Current Project:
Mediations of Nostalgia: Experience, Intermediality, Aesthetics (Edunburgh
University Press, 2026)

From: Per Bäckström <per.backstrom@lnu.se>
Sent: den 9 juni 2026 14:09
To: Anne Holm <anne.holm@lnu.se>; ims.affect@lists.sunet.se
Subject: [Ims.affect] Re: Reminder: next IMS Affect cluster meeting 9 June 10.15-12 (CEST)
|
Vissa som har fått det här meddelandet får inte ofta e-post från
per.backstrom@lnu.se.
Läs om varför det här är viktigt |
Dear all.
Unfortunately, Martin’s text arrived too late, and since I have had problems with my eyes I couldn’t read it even though I wanted, or the other texts again as planned yesterday. I read Niklas text (and the other
texts, except the extra one that I gave up reading since it did not appeal to me) several weeks ago. Niklas text is well written and interesting, and I read it with pleasure. The two other texts, though, are a (maybe too) narrow passage to affect theory for
me, and I would suggest a broader, or different, approach next time. Or is this, as Jørgen wrote yesterday, the new framework of our group? If it is, I must rethink my role in the group, since cognition theory will not be part of my theoretical framework.
Maybe I misunderstood the whole concept of the affect group when it was initiated (and developed in Höör by a few of you).
I couldn’t see that the second text differentiated in a consistent way between aisthesis (the direct sensory perception and bodily experience) and aesthetics (the philosophical reflection upon them) (to broadly
describe one way to distinguish these terms, but to avoid the notion of “art” will of course also be prioritised when researchers decide to use the first term today). Maybe this initiated Jørgen’s question about roughly the same thing in the beginning, but
at least it explains my confusion while reading.
I wish I had had the possibility to re-read the three texts and read Martin’s, but learned a lot from the discussion, thanks! I will work the next days, so:
Have a nice summer!
Per
Skickat från Outlook för Mac