Memory, shared realities, and political possibility through the remnant traces of an art installation. The unstable documentation of several related 1990s collective arts installations, all intentionally ephemeral within the abandoned spaces of condemned buildings on the eve of their destruction, opens up questions of plural achievement, the singularity of truth, and the possible contradictions among versions of evidence. These interconnecting collective arts projects were all intended to break free of the commodified gallery space, while calling attention to the vulnerability of both culture and city to rampant financial speculation. Despite the author’s and the archive’s confusion, different versions of the Khaneh Kolangi (the “To-Be-Demolished House”) together provided a key intervention in Iranian postrevolutionary arts culture and practice. They also offer a ghostly metaphor for the ongoing potential power of collective action, individual and shared memory, and political inspiration. Luce Irigaray’s conceptualizations of a plural self and its potentials offers insight into posibilities for differently understanding power, politics, and history.

Dealing with cumulative environmental problems unavoidably requires repeated interactions (coordination) among multiple and often many actors relevant to the other three CIRCle functions (conceptualization, information, and regulatory intervention). Coordination can promote effective approaches, avoid policy drift, and resolve disputes. Key actors may include multiple agencies and levels of government, quasi-governmental organizations, supranational and international institutions, and nongovernmental organizations representing stakeholders of different kinds. Rules can help overcome significant cost, time, and political disincentives to establishing and maintaining coordination. Two broad types of formal rules for coordination emerge in mechanisms for coordinating conceptualization, information, and intervention: those that establish an institution, and those that provide for interaction in other ways, such as duties to notify or cooperate or undertake joint planning. Legal mechanisms can also expressly provide for dealing with policy drift and resolving disputes between regulatory actors. Real-world examples are provided of legal mechanisms to support these forms of coordination.

The preface considers why historical context is such a rich and complicated lens through which to approach Michael Field and their work, given the complexity of Katharine Bradley and Edith Cooper’s lives and collaborative identity as Michael Field, and the startling range of past historical periods with which their work engaged, including Ancient Greece, Rome, Egypt, and Renaissance Italy, among other periods. The Preface approaches Michael Field as firmly situated within the cultures of the fin de siècle or 1890s, and discusses how their work develops in the twentieth century or modernist era. Finally, the Preface approaches the more difficult aspects of Michael Field’s identity, addressing issues of gender, sexuality, and the incestual dimension of Bradley and Cooper’s relationship.

In the ‘betweens’ of art, research and teaching, this chapter adopts an a/r/tographic approach to explore children’s learning through media art within the Anthropocene, a proposed epoch that acknowledges human impact on Earth’s geology and ecosystems. This learning is thought of as ‘connected learning’, a type of learning that emphasises the integration of educational experiences across various settings, leveraging new media to foster innovative approaches to knowledge creation. The idea of connected learning aligns with the linked concept of children’s lifeworlds – which Arnott and Yelland take to encompass the everyday interactions that children negotiate in daily life as well as the less visible social, technical and material forces that shape those experiences – and the significance of Land as a participant in children’s learning. Children co-labour (or collaborate) with words, materials, technologies and Land to make meaning with their lifeworlds (e.g. semiosis as a process of wording and worlding). They do this in situated practice and through speculation (e.g. by asking “What if...?) to examine possible futures and alternative realities.

This chapter considers Michael Field’s collaborative authorship, focusing on the tension between singularity and plurality in their shared authorial identity. It explores Michael Field’s pseudonymous collaboration as a constant negotiation between multiple voices that radically revises conceptions of both life-writing and verse in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The chapter surveys Katharine Bradley and Edith Cooper’s shared diary Works and Days and their poems, such as ‘A girl’ to show how they generate a sense of unison in their work, in the process achieving a fluid negotiation between different voices.

In this chapter, Sarah Parker interviews Tom Floyd and Sophie Goldrick of Shadow Opera about the process of creating Veritable Michael, an opera and podcast inspired by Michael Field’s life and work. Tom Floyd is the Artistic Director of Shadow Opera and Sophie Goldrick is the Producer and mezzo-soprano, who sings the part of Katharine Bradley in the show. In this interview, they respond to questions about how they originally conceived the piece, why opera is a suitable form for telling Katharine Bradley and Edith Cooper’s story, how the collaborative creative process worked, and how audiences have reacted to the performance and the podcast.

This chapter argues that stand-up comedy events are never apolitical. Politics are expressed and embedded not only in the words that are said but also in the production decisions that shape the context in which they are delivered. The Guilty Feminist podcast is used as an example through which to demonstrate this principle. The podcast presents segments of stand-up comedy within an unconventional format: one that has been designed to serve the political aims and principles of its creators. Key creative decisions are interpreted through the stated political philosophy of the podcast’s co-creator and permanent host, Deborah Frances-White. Her intersectional, feminist politics underpin three important aspects of the podcast’s creative policy: the decision to prioritise women and minority performers, an emphasis on collaboration over competition, and a challenge to conventional wisdoms regarding the nature of comic licence.

The construct of emotional intelligence (EI), also interchangeably referred to as EQ, has engendered considerable scholarly attention within the field of psychology over the past three decades. Despite its significant appeal in business, education and popular literature, EI remains a theme of scientific controversy and investigation. This scrutiny arises from discernible disparities between popular and scholarly interpretations of EI, which are further complicated by the methodological challenge of devising reliable measurement instruments.

Chapter 2 examines how copyright’s treatment of collaboration and crediting elevates might over right with problematic consequences for both creative and egalitarian interests. Drawing on the history of the beloved musical Rent, the chapter begins by assessing how the imposition of copyright’s mutual-intent requirement has transformed questions of joint authorship into a referendum on leverage that fails to recognize modalities of creation that are more collaborative in nature and disproportionately burdens individuals with lesser bargaining power, thereby disadvantaging women, people of color, and the poor. Meanwhile, the striking lack of a law of crediting has undermined the efficacy of the copyright regime by stymieing the allocation of capital resources towards the very individuals with the ability to best advance progress in the arts. And, when viewed through the prisms of gender, race, and class, it has also left those at society’s margins most vulnerable to exploitation and disproportionately susceptible to receiving insufficient credit for, and participation in, the spoils of their creative labors. To better align copyright with its policy goals and to promote social justice, our laws of collaboration and crediting must begin to privilege creativity over clout, and not the other way around.

‘Bella gerant alii.’ In 1516, by means of traditional dynastic finagling, the house of Habsburg acquired the thrones of Castile and Aragon, or Spain for short: the most bellicose and spectacularly expanding state in Latin Christendom. Henceforth, it seemed, the Habsburgs would no longer be able to leave war to others.

Since concluding Castile’s civil conflicts in the 1470s, the Spanish monarchs had, by force of arms, reconquered parts of French Catalonia, and added other acquisitions to their realms: southern Navarre, the western Canary Islands, Melilla, much of the Caribbean, and the kingdoms of Granada and Naples. For what came to be known as the Spanish monarchy it was the start of the most sustained period of success – measured by the crude, but decisive, standards of victory in the field and expansion on the frontiers – any Western European state had achieved since the Roman Empire.

In this chapter, we explore the unique nature of the Arts along with what the Arts ‘do’ for people. The differences between Arts education policy and its provision in practice will be presented with particular reference to the need for broad access to, and equity in, Arts education in primary and early childhood settings. The importance of an approach to Arts education that encourages and embeds learner agency, cultural diversity and gender equity is discussed, and the benefits of sustained ‘quality’ Arts education are presented. Your role in the provision of the Arts in early childhood and primary education is discussed and a ‘praxial’ vision for the Arts in education is presented.

It would be remiss to have a discussion of innovation without addressing the role that entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship can play in it. To begin that discussion, we turn first to Schumpeter’s early work and its enthusiastic (almost theatrical) celebration of the entrepreneur and Baumol’s historical analysis of what it is about our current economic system that leads entrepreneurship to take particularly productive forms and not the unproductive and destructive forms that might have dominated earlier epochs. Then, we problematize. With Gans et al., we explore what conditions might contribute to entrepreneurship spurring Schumpeter’s gale of Creative Destruction and think about why any rational entrepreneur would even attempt to do so. To close the chapter, Nightingale & Coad lay bare the counterintuitive argument that entrepreneurs, for all the bravado and cultural celebration, typically really don’t do that much. Much of what most people believe to be true about entrepreneurs, it turns out, is just a result of survivorship biases and other methodological problems.