Steven Jacobs | University of Alabama - Tuscaloosa (original) (raw)
Papers by Steven Jacobs
Choice Reviews Online, 2010
The continuously growing literature on genocide-both in the form of anthologies and monographs-is... more The continuously growing literature on genocide-both in the form of anthologies and monographs-is often comparative in scope, looking at various genocides from different historical and geographical locations and through particular frames of reference. For example, in 2009, when the book under review was published, two other works appeared: Cathie Carmichael's Genocide Before the Holocaust, which argues that genocidal conflicts before the Holocaust (especially the Balkan wars) were the result of collapsing empires (Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman) and the rise of nationalism, and Allan Cooper's The Geography of Genocide, which applies a feminist analysis of masculine ideologies that characterize perpetrators of different genocides. With respect to anthologies, the 2004 volume Century of Genocides (edited by Samuel Totten, Williams S. Parsons, and Israel W. Charny) and the 2002 volume In God's Name: Genocide and Religion and the Twentieth Century (edited by Omer Bartov and Phyllis Mack) can be mentioned as points of comparison to Steven Jacob's Confronting Genocide. Whereas Totten, Parsons, and Charny pay hardly any attention to religion because they look at genocide from the perspectives of the historical, social, and political sciences, Bartov and Mack address religion but remain primarily focused on the Holocaust. Jacob's new anthology aims at a middle path: it wants to engage the "all-too-prominent role of religion in [the] horror" of genocidal atrocities, beyond the more usual Jewish and Christian responses to the Holocaust (p. x). Hence, the eighteen chapters (all except two were written especially for this volume) cover genocides against Rwandans, Armenians, Bangladeshis, Native Americans, residents of the former Yugoslavia, and Jews during the Holocaust.
Genocide Studies and Prevention, 2011
Shofar: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Jewish Studies, 1996
Shofar: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Jewish Studies, 2012
It is jeopardy when academics who contribute to serious scholarship see a problem in the cover as... more It is jeopardy when academics who contribute to serious scholarship see a problem in the cover assigned to their work. It is double jeopardy when several claim it is misleading to their own contribution and misrepresentative of the prospectus of the volume. And it is unusual and rare when the editor welcomes his colleagues to vent and to write their charges in a public forum. "It is striking and visual," responded a delighted Charles Watkinson, Director of Purdue University Press, to my suggestion that we select James Tissot's Jesus dans la synagogue deroule le livre ("Jesus Unrolls the Book in the Synagogue"), painted in Provence, France between 1886 and 1894 and now hanging in the Brooklyn Museum, as the cover for The Jewish Jesus: Revelation, Reflection, Reclamation (West Lafayette: Purdue University Press, 2011). The Synoptic Gospels speak of Jesus preaching in the synagogue (Mark 6:1-6, Matthew 13:54-58, and especially, Luke 4:16-30). Tissot's painting suggests Luke 4:18-19, where Jesus, touched by the Holy Spirit, reads portions of Isaiah 61:1-2 and 58:6, proclaiming that the poor will be fed and clothed, the oppressed become free, and the blind regain sight. As was the custom of his people, Jesus was celebrating a Sabbath Synagogue moment, reading from the Book which succinctly captures a contention in our book, Jesus in the proximity of Jewish revelation. So I thought. December 2010 was a real December dilemma. I requested and received from all the contributors to The Jewish Jesus their corrected manuscripts in the allotted time. That was done on December 5 (Fourth Day of Chanukka). The next day, I sent with excitement to all the contributors the marketing material on the Shofar Supplements Jesus volume (cover, content, blurb, post card), NOT expecting for one moment the instant reaction to the book cover-from "schmaltzy" to non-enlightened to reverting back to medieval Church triumphalism- all seen in a nineteenth-century French Christian artist's rendition of Jesus reading from the Torah (scroll not "Book") in a synagogue setting. Steve Bowman adroitly commented, "With all due respect I cannot abide the Front cover picture. It is too schmaltzy and East European. If you want a Jewish rebel rabbi (suggested by my words on the back cover), then perhaps a medieval picture of Judah Maccabee would do. (He was after all a messiah too.)" Publication factors precluded the replacement of the Tissot picture. Disappointed but not depressed, I decided-wisely, in retrospect-to engage in disclosure to bring closure. So my invitation to the seven savants, who agreed to write: Thank you for accepting the invitation to comment on the cover to The Jewish Jesus: Revelation, Reflection, Reclamation. Our book explores the Jewishness of Jesus. Does this picture do justice to this theme? You may want to reflect on the picture in a modern context or in the context of Second Temple Judaism or in the tapestry of Tradition ( Jewish and/or Christian). Or, in the content of your chapter, does this portrait of Jesus in the synagogue challenge, confuse, disturb, or enlighten? Wrestle with a paradox: the scholar sees rupture and the observer sees rapture in Jesus in a prayer shawl reading from the Torah (Book). Write on the whims of scholarship and popularity and in whatever genre you choose. Be creative and imaginative. Zev Garber in collaboration with Steve Bowman, Michael Cook, Eugene Fisher, Steve Jacobs, Sara Mandell, Norman Simms, and Penny Wheeler Responses You Can't Judge a Book by Its Cover?!? Responding to the Cover of The Jewish Jesus The initial "controversy" (with a very, very small "c")-which I genuinely would like to call a machloqet l'shem shamayim/"disagreement for the sake of Heaven"- in response to the cover our editor Zev Garber chose for the volume The Jewish Jesus: Revelation, Reflection, Reclamation, which has engendered these short essays as well as Zev's rationale, is in the long-standing masorah/tradition of Talmudic give-and-take. …
Shofar: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Jewish Studies, 2005
Introduction Among the falsely perceived myths not only of this historical American Jewish experi... more Introduction Among the falsely perceived myths not only of this historical American Jewish experience but the contemporary one as well is that of a singular American Jewish community, seemingly united by such common factors as religious faith and belief; love of and support for a continuously beleaguered State of Israel; higher educational agendas for the young; support for defensive organizations against the on-going post-Holocaust/Shoah specter of antisemitism; politically left-wing, liberal, primarily Democratic voter identification; uncanny fund-raising abilities; opposition to inter-religious or mixed-marriages; socio-economic concerns associated with middle-class to upper-middle-class to upper-class lives, and the like. The reality of the American Jewish community is, however, quite the opposite: While certain concerns may assume dominating positions momentarily only to be replaced by others, the myth of unity is precisely that: myth. American Jews remain divided along religious lines, have strong and varied opinions about the State of Israel and its political and military behaviors, are divided about how best to confront antisemitism both in the American context and elsewhere, continue to be conflicted about the best course of action in response to increasing intermarriage rates, find themselves increasingly both protective and preservative of their achieved socio-economic status, and the like. Commensurate with this historical and contemporary divisiveness is the one question that, in truth, has been the bane of the American Jewish experience: Who, in fact, speaks for the Jews? Who best represents on the national and international stages Jewish concerns? The plethora of Jewish organizations -- more than 600, according to the 2003 edition of The American Jewish Yearbook published by The American Jewish Committee -- dramatically and graphically supports the contention that there are many representative voices at the table purporting to speak for American Jews, some louder than others depending upon the issue and context, and more often than not, upon membership numbers. Thus, just as the Jews of the United States do not form a unified community, so, too, do their representative spokespersons not speak with one voice regardless of the issues before them. Enter Hollywood icon Mel Gibson and his religio-cinematic blockbuster The Passion of the Christ, pre-screened in February 2004, released to coincide with the Easter holy day season, and complete with an end-of-August DVD availability. Though much ink has already been spilled about every possible aspect of this film and its implications by every possible commentator, the one truism that speaks loudest is the following: Jews and Christians, in the main, whether or not they sat together or saw the film together, saw two very different movies out of their, ultimately, divergent concerns. For many Christians, the film was a religiously cathartic experience, truly expanding their understanding as never before of the loving gift of the Christ's willing suffering and life-sacrifice, and re-affirmed for many the culpability and guilt of all humanity responsible for His death. For Jews, the continuously negative portrayals of the Jewish leaders, primarily priests, and the Jewish populace was, quite simply, the newest adumbration of antisemitism -- a modern, technological "Passion play" not radically other than that produced once every decade in Oberammergau, Germany; the very same play which saw Adolf Hitler in attendance and confirming for him and others of his ilk the Jew as eternal and perpetual enemy. Thus, for these same Christians the film was a religio-theological experience; for Jews the film was an historical experience. And into the fray came any number of Jewish organizations and Jewish leaders and their Jewish concerns. Who said what and what they said are the loci of this essay. I. The Findings Beyond any question, the one American Jewish organization which "led the fight" against the perceived antisemitic agenda of the film and its co-writer and producer was and remains the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith under its National Director Dr. …
Journal of Genocide Research, 1999
Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Genocide and Memory, 2018
The Polish-American-Jewish international lawyer and scholar Dr. Raphael Lemkin (1900-1959) coined... more The Polish-American-Jewish international lawyer and scholar Dr. Raphael Lemkin (1900-1959) coined our word "genocide" and was the motivating force behind the 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (commonly referred to as the Genocide Convention). He is also the scholarly parent of the emerging field of Genocide studies, an outgrowth and expansion of the earlier field of Holocaust studies. In examining his biography, one incident looms large: of a teenage boy who reads a novel about the Roman emperor Nero's (37-68) horrendous treatment of the Christians in his realm, and, living in the world of pre-and post-World War I antisemitic Poland, begins a reading journey that will cause him to discover other examples of genocide throughout human history (e.g., the Armenian Genocide). Coupled with Lemkin's escape during World War II and the tragedy of the Holocaust, tantalizing questions suggest themselves: What impact did his studies have upon him and his life's work coupled with his own lived experiences? What role did his filtered memory of those events have upon his thinking? To what degree did they shape his commitment to international law as the vehicle to eliminate the scourge of genocide? These and other questions are explored, including the author's own thinking vis-à-vis the relationship between genocide and memory.
Shofar: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Jewish Studies, 2012
Religions
Twice in the Hebrew Bible-Exodus 17:14-16 and Deuteronomy 25: 17-19-the ancient Israelites were c... more Twice in the Hebrew Bible-Exodus 17:14-16 and Deuteronomy 25: 17-19-the ancient Israelites were commanded to "blot out" the memory of Amalek, their enemy for all time (as God intended to do as well). Yet, because these texts are a part of Jewish (and Christian) religious traditions, annually these passages are read in the synagogue on the appropriate Sabbath occasions in the annual reading cycle, and linked to the Festival of Purim that is based on the Book of Esther. Over the course of Jewish history, Amalek has served as the symbolic enemy of the Jewish people (e.g., Armenians, Nazis, Palestinians); indeed, all of the enemies of the Jews were and are understood to be descendants of the original Amalekites, and thus worthy not only of enmity but of destruction as well (e.g., Haman, Antiochus, Titus, Hadrian, Torquemada, Khmelnitsky, Hitler). Today, many of those in Israel allied with the so-called "settler movement" associated with right-of-center Orthodox Judaism and located among populations primarily of Palestinian Muslims, and Arabs view them as the descendants of Amalek as well, and thus sanction and legitimate their own at times violent actions and behaviors. At its most transparent level, responding to Amalek is a response to antisemitism, both historical and contemporary. This paper examines the history of Amalekut ("Amalek-ness") within the Jewish (and Christian) religious tradition, the role of memory and forgetting of those survivors and their descendants traumatized by their enemies, the current manner of branding one's enemies as descendants of Amalek, and whether, in truth, reconciliation is even possible among enemies of long standing. The implications and consequences for all of the divided groups thus becomes an enormous challenge. Practical suggestions are offered at the end as potential models for both present and future work as well.
Http Dx Doi Org 10 1080 03087291003673113, Oct 25, 2010
... attention is drawn towards new details and ambivalences.2 Barthes provocatively illustrates h... more ... attention is drawn towards new details and ambivalences.2 Barthes provocatively illustrates his state-ments with frames of films by Sergei Eisenstein, a ... Stills testify to a ponderous and clinical nineteenth-century aesthetic of scrutiny, which, in the words of Max Kozloff, 'is quite at ...
Journal of Ecumenical Studies, Sep 22, 2011
Acm Sigchi Bulletin, 1990
Abstract The purpose of the CHI'89 Workshop on Real-Time, Decision Support Compu... more Abstract The purpose of the CHI'89 Workshop on Real-Time, Decision Support Computer-Human Interaction was to explore issues facing users of crucial real-time, decision support computer systems such as air traffic control computers, tactical command and control systems, and missile warning computers. The workshop built on ideas presented at an earlier workshop at CHI'88 (1).
Choice Reviews Online, 2010
The continuously growing literature on genocide-both in the form of anthologies and monographs-is... more The continuously growing literature on genocide-both in the form of anthologies and monographs-is often comparative in scope, looking at various genocides from different historical and geographical locations and through particular frames of reference. For example, in 2009, when the book under review was published, two other works appeared: Cathie Carmichael's Genocide Before the Holocaust, which argues that genocidal conflicts before the Holocaust (especially the Balkan wars) were the result of collapsing empires (Austro-Hungarian and Ottoman) and the rise of nationalism, and Allan Cooper's The Geography of Genocide, which applies a feminist analysis of masculine ideologies that characterize perpetrators of different genocides. With respect to anthologies, the 2004 volume Century of Genocides (edited by Samuel Totten, Williams S. Parsons, and Israel W. Charny) and the 2002 volume In God's Name: Genocide and Religion and the Twentieth Century (edited by Omer Bartov and Phyllis Mack) can be mentioned as points of comparison to Steven Jacob's Confronting Genocide. Whereas Totten, Parsons, and Charny pay hardly any attention to religion because they look at genocide from the perspectives of the historical, social, and political sciences, Bartov and Mack address religion but remain primarily focused on the Holocaust. Jacob's new anthology aims at a middle path: it wants to engage the "all-too-prominent role of religion in [the] horror" of genocidal atrocities, beyond the more usual Jewish and Christian responses to the Holocaust (p. x). Hence, the eighteen chapters (all except two were written especially for this volume) cover genocides against Rwandans, Armenians, Bangladeshis, Native Americans, residents of the former Yugoslavia, and Jews during the Holocaust.
Genocide Studies and Prevention, 2011
Shofar: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Jewish Studies, 1996
Shofar: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Jewish Studies, 2012
It is jeopardy when academics who contribute to serious scholarship see a problem in the cover as... more It is jeopardy when academics who contribute to serious scholarship see a problem in the cover assigned to their work. It is double jeopardy when several claim it is misleading to their own contribution and misrepresentative of the prospectus of the volume. And it is unusual and rare when the editor welcomes his colleagues to vent and to write their charges in a public forum. "It is striking and visual," responded a delighted Charles Watkinson, Director of Purdue University Press, to my suggestion that we select James Tissot's Jesus dans la synagogue deroule le livre ("Jesus Unrolls the Book in the Synagogue"), painted in Provence, France between 1886 and 1894 and now hanging in the Brooklyn Museum, as the cover for The Jewish Jesus: Revelation, Reflection, Reclamation (West Lafayette: Purdue University Press, 2011). The Synoptic Gospels speak of Jesus preaching in the synagogue (Mark 6:1-6, Matthew 13:54-58, and especially, Luke 4:16-30). Tissot's painting suggests Luke 4:18-19, where Jesus, touched by the Holy Spirit, reads portions of Isaiah 61:1-2 and 58:6, proclaiming that the poor will be fed and clothed, the oppressed become free, and the blind regain sight. As was the custom of his people, Jesus was celebrating a Sabbath Synagogue moment, reading from the Book which succinctly captures a contention in our book, Jesus in the proximity of Jewish revelation. So I thought. December 2010 was a real December dilemma. I requested and received from all the contributors to The Jewish Jesus their corrected manuscripts in the allotted time. That was done on December 5 (Fourth Day of Chanukka). The next day, I sent with excitement to all the contributors the marketing material on the Shofar Supplements Jesus volume (cover, content, blurb, post card), NOT expecting for one moment the instant reaction to the book cover-from "schmaltzy" to non-enlightened to reverting back to medieval Church triumphalism- all seen in a nineteenth-century French Christian artist's rendition of Jesus reading from the Torah (scroll not "Book") in a synagogue setting. Steve Bowman adroitly commented, "With all due respect I cannot abide the Front cover picture. It is too schmaltzy and East European. If you want a Jewish rebel rabbi (suggested by my words on the back cover), then perhaps a medieval picture of Judah Maccabee would do. (He was after all a messiah too.)" Publication factors precluded the replacement of the Tissot picture. Disappointed but not depressed, I decided-wisely, in retrospect-to engage in disclosure to bring closure. So my invitation to the seven savants, who agreed to write: Thank you for accepting the invitation to comment on the cover to The Jewish Jesus: Revelation, Reflection, Reclamation. Our book explores the Jewishness of Jesus. Does this picture do justice to this theme? You may want to reflect on the picture in a modern context or in the context of Second Temple Judaism or in the tapestry of Tradition ( Jewish and/or Christian). Or, in the content of your chapter, does this portrait of Jesus in the synagogue challenge, confuse, disturb, or enlighten? Wrestle with a paradox: the scholar sees rupture and the observer sees rapture in Jesus in a prayer shawl reading from the Torah (Book). Write on the whims of scholarship and popularity and in whatever genre you choose. Be creative and imaginative. Zev Garber in collaboration with Steve Bowman, Michael Cook, Eugene Fisher, Steve Jacobs, Sara Mandell, Norman Simms, and Penny Wheeler Responses You Can't Judge a Book by Its Cover?!? Responding to the Cover of The Jewish Jesus The initial "controversy" (with a very, very small "c")-which I genuinely would like to call a machloqet l'shem shamayim/"disagreement for the sake of Heaven"- in response to the cover our editor Zev Garber chose for the volume The Jewish Jesus: Revelation, Reflection, Reclamation, which has engendered these short essays as well as Zev's rationale, is in the long-standing masorah/tradition of Talmudic give-and-take. …
Shofar: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Jewish Studies, 2005
Introduction Among the falsely perceived myths not only of this historical American Jewish experi... more Introduction Among the falsely perceived myths not only of this historical American Jewish experience but the contemporary one as well is that of a singular American Jewish community, seemingly united by such common factors as religious faith and belief; love of and support for a continuously beleaguered State of Israel; higher educational agendas for the young; support for defensive organizations against the on-going post-Holocaust/Shoah specter of antisemitism; politically left-wing, liberal, primarily Democratic voter identification; uncanny fund-raising abilities; opposition to inter-religious or mixed-marriages; socio-economic concerns associated with middle-class to upper-middle-class to upper-class lives, and the like. The reality of the American Jewish community is, however, quite the opposite: While certain concerns may assume dominating positions momentarily only to be replaced by others, the myth of unity is precisely that: myth. American Jews remain divided along religious lines, have strong and varied opinions about the State of Israel and its political and military behaviors, are divided about how best to confront antisemitism both in the American context and elsewhere, continue to be conflicted about the best course of action in response to increasing intermarriage rates, find themselves increasingly both protective and preservative of their achieved socio-economic status, and the like. Commensurate with this historical and contemporary divisiveness is the one question that, in truth, has been the bane of the American Jewish experience: Who, in fact, speaks for the Jews? Who best represents on the national and international stages Jewish concerns? The plethora of Jewish organizations -- more than 600, according to the 2003 edition of The American Jewish Yearbook published by The American Jewish Committee -- dramatically and graphically supports the contention that there are many representative voices at the table purporting to speak for American Jews, some louder than others depending upon the issue and context, and more often than not, upon membership numbers. Thus, just as the Jews of the United States do not form a unified community, so, too, do their representative spokespersons not speak with one voice regardless of the issues before them. Enter Hollywood icon Mel Gibson and his religio-cinematic blockbuster The Passion of the Christ, pre-screened in February 2004, released to coincide with the Easter holy day season, and complete with an end-of-August DVD availability. Though much ink has already been spilled about every possible aspect of this film and its implications by every possible commentator, the one truism that speaks loudest is the following: Jews and Christians, in the main, whether or not they sat together or saw the film together, saw two very different movies out of their, ultimately, divergent concerns. For many Christians, the film was a religiously cathartic experience, truly expanding their understanding as never before of the loving gift of the Christ's willing suffering and life-sacrifice, and re-affirmed for many the culpability and guilt of all humanity responsible for His death. For Jews, the continuously negative portrayals of the Jewish leaders, primarily priests, and the Jewish populace was, quite simply, the newest adumbration of antisemitism -- a modern, technological "Passion play" not radically other than that produced once every decade in Oberammergau, Germany; the very same play which saw Adolf Hitler in attendance and confirming for him and others of his ilk the Jew as eternal and perpetual enemy. Thus, for these same Christians the film was a religio-theological experience; for Jews the film was an historical experience. And into the fray came any number of Jewish organizations and Jewish leaders and their Jewish concerns. Who said what and what they said are the loci of this essay. I. The Findings Beyond any question, the one American Jewish organization which "led the fight" against the perceived antisemitic agenda of the film and its co-writer and producer was and remains the Anti-Defamation League of B'nai B'rith under its National Director Dr. …
Journal of Genocide Research, 1999
Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Genocide and Memory, 2018
The Polish-American-Jewish international lawyer and scholar Dr. Raphael Lemkin (1900-1959) coined... more The Polish-American-Jewish international lawyer and scholar Dr. Raphael Lemkin (1900-1959) coined our word "genocide" and was the motivating force behind the 1948 United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (commonly referred to as the Genocide Convention). He is also the scholarly parent of the emerging field of Genocide studies, an outgrowth and expansion of the earlier field of Holocaust studies. In examining his biography, one incident looms large: of a teenage boy who reads a novel about the Roman emperor Nero's (37-68) horrendous treatment of the Christians in his realm, and, living in the world of pre-and post-World War I antisemitic Poland, begins a reading journey that will cause him to discover other examples of genocide throughout human history (e.g., the Armenian Genocide). Coupled with Lemkin's escape during World War II and the tragedy of the Holocaust, tantalizing questions suggest themselves: What impact did his studies have upon him and his life's work coupled with his own lived experiences? What role did his filtered memory of those events have upon his thinking? To what degree did they shape his commitment to international law as the vehicle to eliminate the scourge of genocide? These and other questions are explored, including the author's own thinking vis-à-vis the relationship between genocide and memory.
Shofar: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Jewish Studies, 2012
Religions
Twice in the Hebrew Bible-Exodus 17:14-16 and Deuteronomy 25: 17-19-the ancient Israelites were c... more Twice in the Hebrew Bible-Exodus 17:14-16 and Deuteronomy 25: 17-19-the ancient Israelites were commanded to "blot out" the memory of Amalek, their enemy for all time (as God intended to do as well). Yet, because these texts are a part of Jewish (and Christian) religious traditions, annually these passages are read in the synagogue on the appropriate Sabbath occasions in the annual reading cycle, and linked to the Festival of Purim that is based on the Book of Esther. Over the course of Jewish history, Amalek has served as the symbolic enemy of the Jewish people (e.g., Armenians, Nazis, Palestinians); indeed, all of the enemies of the Jews were and are understood to be descendants of the original Amalekites, and thus worthy not only of enmity but of destruction as well (e.g., Haman, Antiochus, Titus, Hadrian, Torquemada, Khmelnitsky, Hitler). Today, many of those in Israel allied with the so-called "settler movement" associated with right-of-center Orthodox Judaism and located among populations primarily of Palestinian Muslims, and Arabs view them as the descendants of Amalek as well, and thus sanction and legitimate their own at times violent actions and behaviors. At its most transparent level, responding to Amalek is a response to antisemitism, both historical and contemporary. This paper examines the history of Amalekut ("Amalek-ness") within the Jewish (and Christian) religious tradition, the role of memory and forgetting of those survivors and their descendants traumatized by their enemies, the current manner of branding one's enemies as descendants of Amalek, and whether, in truth, reconciliation is even possible among enemies of long standing. The implications and consequences for all of the divided groups thus becomes an enormous challenge. Practical suggestions are offered at the end as potential models for both present and future work as well.
Http Dx Doi Org 10 1080 03087291003673113, Oct 25, 2010
... attention is drawn towards new details and ambivalences.2 Barthes provocatively illustrates h... more ... attention is drawn towards new details and ambivalences.2 Barthes provocatively illustrates his state-ments with frames of films by Sergei Eisenstein, a ... Stills testify to a ponderous and clinical nineteenth-century aesthetic of scrutiny, which, in the words of Max Kozloff, 'is quite at ...
Journal of Ecumenical Studies, Sep 22, 2011
Acm Sigchi Bulletin, 1990
Abstract The purpose of the CHI'89 Workshop on Real-Time, Decision Support Compu... more Abstract The purpose of the CHI'89 Workshop on Real-Time, Decision Support Computer-Human Interaction was to explore issues facing users of crucial real-time, decision support computer systems such as air traffic control computers, tactical command and control systems, and missile warning computers. The workshop built on ideas presented at an earlier workshop at CHI'88 (1).