Signal or Noise? Information Theory and the Novel

In the context of a hostile funding environment, universities are increasingly asked to justify their output in narrowly defined economic terms, and this can be difficult in Humanities or Arts faculties where productivity is rarely reducible to a simple financial indicator. This can lead to a number of immediate consequences that I have no need to rehearse here, but can also result in some interesting tensions within the academic community itself. First is that which has become known as the ‘Science Wars’: the increasingly acrimonious exchanges between scientists and scientific academics and cultural critics or theorists about who has the right to describe the world. Much has already been said—and much remains to be said—about this issue, but it is not my intention to discuss it here. Rather, I will look at a second area of contestation: the incorporation of scientific theory into literary or cultural criticism. Much of this work comes from a genuine commitment to interdisciplinarity, and an appreciation of insights that a fresh perspective can bring to a familiar object. However, some can be seen as cynical attempts to lend literary studies the sort of empirical legitimacy of the sciences. In particular, I want to look at a number of critics who have applied information theory to the literary work. In this paper, I will examine several instances of this sort of criticism, and then, through an analysis of a novel by American author Richard Powers, Three Farmers on Their Way to a Dance, show how this sort of criticism merely reduces the meaningful analysis of a complex literary text.

Crisis management and risk communication: Why the food industry must get it right

There is public unease about food-related issues including food additives, food poisoning bacteria and GM ingredients. The public wants evidence of no risks, but all regulators can ever offer is no evidence of risk or evidence of a very small risk. The situation is complex because experts and non-experts can perceive the same risk in vastly different ways. The way in which the food industry manages crises and communicates risks will determine the public acceptance and success of new technologies such as GM foods and nanomaterials. There is a need for the food industry (including regulators and scientific experts) to sharpen up their risk communication skills to ensure that technical innovations are accepted by consumers, and crises such as food recalls do not undermine the public's confidence in the food industry. The AIFST has a key role to play in driving the risk communication process and allaying public unease about food-related issues.