Category Archives: Events

Defending alchemy

Posted on by
1

Doctor in spe Sara Norja defended her doctoral dissertation, Alchemy in the Vernacular: An Edition and Study of Early English Witnesses of The Mirror of Alchemy, on Thursday 27 May 2021. Here, she writes about the viva and the days leading up to it.

Due to the pandemic the viva was on Zoom, so the arrangements were a little different from usual. I wasn’t able to have a karonkka – the traditional academic afterparty following a viva. I can’t deny I would have loved to have one, but having fewer things to organise before the viva was also a relief, as the week of my defence was a busy one.

On Monday we had a Zoom rehearsal in the Educarium lecture hall where the viva would be broadcast from. Professor Matti Peikola and Dr Janne Skaffari (my PhD supervisors) were there with me in person, as Matti was the custos and Janne was the marshal (airut) in charge of Zoom proceedings during the viva. We had a short Zoom call with my opponent Professor Peter J. Grund (University of Kansas), and sorted out all the technical matters. It was a relief to see the room I would defend my dissertation in, and to make sure that the connections all worked!

On Thursday 27th, the day of the viva, the nerves hit me. It was good that the viva was as late as 16.00 (due to the time difference with Kansas), because despite the gnawing feeling in my belly, I even managed to eat lunch before it. However, once I was actually in Educarium and the viva was about to commence, I calmed down. The final minutes before turning on the video and sound on Zoom were the longest I’ve ever known, though!

The custos Professor Matti Peikola and I sat down in front of the camera, facing the lecture hall with six other people in it (our technical support Satu Koivumäki, Janne, and four of my family members). Quite different from the experience of sitting in front of a bigger live audience! However, I knew there were lots of people watching through Zoom, so the audience online was huge. I tried not to concentrate on that, though, but to focus on my opponent, who I could see on the screen set up opposite me.

I felt unreal – was this major event actually happening after seven years of working on my dissertation? But once the viva officially started with the customary opening words, and I began giving my lectio praecursoria (the traditional speech given by the PhD candidate at the start), everything started to flow. I gave my lectio, and asked Professor Grund to present his criticisms of my dissertation. He gave his opening statement, and then we proceeded into the questions.

I had been told previously that once the defence actually starts, it can be a delightful experience as well as a scary one. This was certainly true for me. Professor Grund asked some pretty tough questions, but I discovered that it was incredibly rewarding and fun to answer them and to discuss my dissertation with him. He was the best opponent I could have hoped for. By the time Professor Grund had given his concluding statement and the viva was over, I was fizzing with excitement and pent-up nerves. The defence was concluded by the custos, and we could proceed to congratulations.

Relieved smiles after the ordeal!

Even though the pandemic meant I couldn’t have a proper karonkka, we rounded off the evening with a lovely outdoors event with a small number of my colleagues from the Department. Some excellent traditions were upheld despite the pandemic, and overall the day will stand out as a landmark event in my life.

Text by Sara Norja

Photos by Janne Skaffari and Mari-Liisa Varila

Two days to go: Upcoming defense on second language speech fluency

Posted on by

Doctoral candidate Pauliina Peltonen will defend her PhD dissertation entitled Individual and Interactional Speech Fluency in L2 English from a Problem-solving Perspective: A Mixed-methods Approach this week on September 11th, 2020. The audience will be able to follow the defense online via Zoom. Professor Judit Kormos from Lancaster University will be the opponent and Dr Pekka Lintunen will act as custos.

A doctoral defense is the final part of postgraduate studies: it is the end of one process, but also the beginning of another phase, postdoctoral studies. Defending your PhD is both exciting and nerve-wracking. You finally have the chance to talk about your research and what you have been working on for years. However, the opponent asks the questions, and the task is to react to those questions in the best way possible. Custos is the chair of the public examination of a dissertation and often the supervisor of the doctoral candidate. Normally the custos has to do three things: say one sentence to start the examination, another one to end it, and most importantly, sit quietly but stay awake during the examination—not always an easy task!

Pauliina’s dissertation addresses a central aspect of second language (L2) proficiency and speaking skills: fluency. In the dissertation, she examines L2 speech fluency and learners’ resources for maintaining it based on monologue and dialogue speech samples. Fluency is analyzed with a variety of traditional temporal measures (e.g., speech rate and silent pauses), but also from the perspective of so-called fluency resources that can help to maintain speech fluency (e.g., filled pauses, such as uh/um, and repetitions).

The findings show that L2 speech fluency is a multifaceted phenomenon. Fluency should be studied with a combination of quantitative and qualitative methods: the mixed-methods approach provides a more comprehensive picture of fluency than either approach alone. The study also shows that fluency can be viewed as a collaborative phenomenon, while traditionally, fluency has mostly been examined from an individual’s perspective based on monologue data. The study demonstrated that in interaction, learners maintain the flow of speech collaboratively across turns, for instance, by minimizing pause time.

The study provides new insights into L2 speech fluency—a topic that has become a key area of study in the Department of English in recent years. We also collaborate with other fluency researchers in the School of Languages and Translation Studies. Two fluency research projects have been launched just this autumn in the department: Fluency across Multilingual Speakers (MultiFluency; funded by the Swedish Cultural Foundation in Finland 2020–2021) and Fluency and Disfluency Features in L2 Speech (FDF2, funded by the Academy of Finland 2020–2024), both led by Dr Pekka Lintunen. So when one phase is soon over for Pauliina, the next phase will begin in these research projects. We are looking forward to continuing our collaboration and gaining more insights into L2 speech fluency in the near future!

Zoom link for the defense on Friday: https://utu.zoom.us/j/61267813839

Text by Pauliina Peltonen and Pekka Lintunen

Photo by Pauliina Peltonen

So long, Marianne: Professor Liljeström’s farewell lecture

Posted on by
Reply

There are (at least) three important lecture occasions in a professor’s career. First, there is the sample lecture testing the professorial candidates’ teaching abilities when the post is filled. After being appointed to their post, the new professor gives an inaugural lecture to demonstrate their newly verified professorial wisdom. Finally, at the end of their career, the farewell lecture delivers the professor’s goodbye to academia as they join the ranks of emeriti.

Many of our students at the English department are interested in topics of gender and sexuality in their papers and theses and choose Gender Studies as a minor subject. In the past, I was one of those students and now, I am an English scholar with questions of gender and sexuality at the centre of my research into Anglophone literature and culture. The farewell lecture of my former teacher, boss, viva custos, and mentor, Professor of Gender Studies, Marianne Liljeström, took place on August 25th, 2020 in the socially distanced lecture hall as well as online to celebrate her long career in building the now well-institutionalized discipline of gender studies in the Finnish, Nordic and international contexts.

Professor Liljeström lecturing from the podium one last time.

Social distancing in the lecture hall. Fifty people were invited but at least another fifty participated via Zoom.

In addition to the farewell keynote, in her true collective fashion, Professor Liljeström welcomed a panel of speakers to join her after her lecture. This is how I will remember Marianne as a scholar and educator, always encouraging others to join her endeavors and working in a collective fashion. By inviting three panelists to discuss the past and future of her discipline, Marianne once again showed her solidarity, as she put the focus from herself to the thoughts, ideas and theories surrounding the field and how best to continue building it.

Professor Liljeström listens in her typical inquisitive fashion as Salla Aldrin Salskov details her views on pressing questions regarding the field.

A historian by training, Liljeström began her lecture by placing the major points of her professional career on a timeline to chronicle how timing has been on her side throughout: thanks to the Finnish education system, she was able to study at no cost despite coming from a humble background. She was also able to study abroad (in Moscow, Berkeley, Birmingham and elsewhere), and her own academic training coincided with the development of Gender Studies as a discipline, which she then as a full-fledged scholar awas ble to help institutionalize.

One of the important key remarks that Marianne shared with us in the farewell lecture, was how history is never merely discursive and hence immaterial, but that the work of remembering begins with fleeting affective images and sensations, when we experience something as nostalgic, get teary eyed, giggly or even when we stay silent. Materiality is always embedded in remembering, which is affective (related to feelings) by its very nature. Marianne invites us to constantly question those assumptions we are taking for granted, as the conditions of determining “facts” such as what gender might mean varies by time and ideology. Universality pushes through, but it is at the same time constantly renegotiated for a more democratic future.

Professor Liljeström is shocked by the influx of flowers and bubbly filling the lectern as well-wishers pay their respects at the send-off.

As she passed on the torch for younger generations to change the world by thought and action alike, it is time to thank Professor Liljeström for the wonderful work she has done over the years. The event was cheerful in mood, but saying goodbye incites feelings of nostalgia and other emotions, so I assume I was not the only one finding it difficult to sum up one’s feelings at the end. Perhaps best leave it to the words of Leonard Cohen: “So long, Marianne/It’s time that we began to laugh/And cry and cry and laugh about it all again”. And that’s what we did. Here’s to happy retirement days full of fun and laughter!

A round of applause and heartfelt thanks from all of us in the community to the magnificient Marianne!

Text: Elina Valovirta

Photos: Tilda Junko

Translating multilingual texts

Posted on by
Reply

Another PhD defence in just under two months! A number of doctoral candidates of the English Department are now finishing their research projects. On 24 January, it was Laura Ekberg’s big day.

Laura’s research topic combines translation studies and literature and focuses on a phenomenon also studied in linguistics. As it happens, code-switching was at the heart of the previous viva as well. The title of her dissertation is Heterolingualism and Cultural integrity in Finnish Translations of Anglophone Caribbean Novels; it is available online. The members of Laura’s team of supervisors were Outi Paloposki, Elina Valovirta and Joel Kuortti – who acted as custos – and the opponent was Professor Simona Bertacco from the University of Louisville. The viva started with the important question of which field of research the dissertation belongs to (answer: translation studies). Overall, we witnessed a remarkably friendly discussion by two experts, which really is the best kind of viva. The opponent found the material examined in the dissertation sufficient and representative and was very happy with what Laura had discovered and the poise with which she brought in multiple perspectives.

Professor Simona Bertacco giving her assessment of Laura’s dissertation.

I attended the viva as Laura’s colleague, a former teacher of hers, and a linguist with a keen interest in different approaches to code-switching and, more broadly, multilingual practices. Colleagues attending doctoral defences are always excited for the candidate, hoping their support radiates from the audience to the front of the room. Having known Laura since she was a BA student, I was happy about the confidence with which she brought together language, literature and translation – the three main topics of the Department – and about the fact that the varied training showed in the research. As a code-switching researcher myself, I was particularly interested in the recent campaign for not italicising code-switches in Caribbean literature, which goes against the common practice of separating the ‘other’ language from the main language of the text by using italics. Not italicising suggests that multilingual language use is not an aberration but something ordinary; there is no need to draw the readers’ attention to it.

Custos and Doctor in spe listening to the Opponent’s addresss.

Laura said in the viva that she became interested in Caribbean literature in the MA thesis seminar. The things that catch your eye as a student may take you a long way.

A relieved smile at the karonkka-party.

Text by Janne Skaffari

Photos by Damon Tringham

Philology, pragmatics and code-switching: My first viva

Posted on by
2

I had never been to a doctoral defence also known as a viva before, so I was immediately interested when I heard there was one taking place with our very own Aleksi Mäkilähde on the hot seat. Aleksi’s doctoral dissertation is called The Philological-Pragmatic Approach: A Study of Language Choice and Code-Switching in Early Modern English School Performances and as the title suggests, it examines code-switching in plays and poems by school boys at the King’s School, Canterbury, in 1665–1684. Eager to learn more about the subject, I decided to attend the viva, which took place 5 December 2019.

This being my first viva, I wasn’t quite sure how I should dress. The event soon starting at the Quantum Auditorium, I hastily did a few Google searches and found out that as an audience member, one is not expected to wear anything too fancy. I didn’t want to go under-dressed, so I took off my hoodie, put on a smart shirt and off I went. As I arrived at Quantum, I saw the candidate himself pacing around in the hall. I grabbed a copy of the thesis and sat at the back of the room. I looked at the people around me and judged my choice of clothes to be fitting.

A few minutes passed. Suddenly everyone jumped up as the candidate walked in, followed by the custos, Professor Emeritus Risto Hiltunen, and the opponent, Professor Emeritus Herbert Schendl from the University of Vienna. The custos and the opponent were wearing colourful old-timey robes, which I assumed were customary, but later learned differ depending on the university.

The custos spoke a few words, the candidate briefly presented his thesis in Finnish and then it was time for the opponent to ask his questions. The discussion was more informal and relaxed than I had anticipated. Some questions were more hard-hitting, but mostly it was a friendly discussion about the difference between a code-switch and a loanword, and what kind of consequences code-switching could have. I have to be honest; the discussion went quite deep into the nitty-gritty and at times, I had a hard time following. The highlight of the discussion was when Aleksi got up to the blackboard and drew something resembling a wedding cake to illustrate the complex nature of a play-within-a-play.

Some two hours after it began, the discussion ended, and the opponent gave his finishing statement. He commended the candidate’s hard work of developing a new philological-pragmatic approach and his detailed analysis of code-switching in the school plays. The custos, who had remained silent the whole time (which is customary) declared the viva to be over. Outside the auditorium, hands were shaken, gifts were given, and cake was had. To my disappointment, there was not a top hat nor sword in sight. I guess those were saved for later.

Gratulationes to Aleksi on his achievement and all the best in his future career!

Text by Otto Tarkka

Photos by Janne Skaffari

Trextuality – at the intersection of textual scholarship and translation studies

Posted on by
Reply

The XII annual colloquium of Variantti, the Finnish network of researchers working on textual scholarship and scholarly editing, was held on Friday, 4 October 2019, at the University of Turku to foster interdisciplinarity between textual scholarship and translation studies.The theme trextuality encompassed textuality, transmission and translation, concepts central in both fields. In translation studies, trextuality means going beyond the source-target text pair and in textual scholarships, it refers to observing the transmission of texts across languages. Some fifty attendees heard eleven talks addressing trextual issues.

Tanja Toropainen discussed the continuum of editions and translations behind Codex Westh and its Ars Morendi part, which is a translation from German – except that the The Bible quotations are translations from Swedish. Sara Norja pointed out that like many of early English texts, also The Mirror of Alchemy is a translation – the source language of the various versions (Latin or French) can be deduced from how the alchemy-related terminology is translated. Niko Huttunen & Tuomas Juntunen explained that the forthcoming Finnish translation of The Bible for mobile platforms will have vocabulary different from what the audience is accustomed to because the language is made understandable for 20-year-olds.

Kristiina Taivalkoski-Shilov talked about the long,
multilingual transmission history of Robinson Crusoe.

Leena Eilittä discussed intertextuality in Herman Broch’s works; for example, Broch changed the title of his poem into Hille Mitternacht (A clear midnight) after having translated Walt Whitman’s A clear midnight into German. Marja Sorvari addressed the intertwinedness writing, writing in a second language, and self-translation through the example of two translingual authors, Zinaida Lindén and Polina Kopylova.

Instead of studying what changes in translation, Taivalkoski-Shilov showed how Friday’s way of talking remains unchanged in the Finnish Robinson Crusoe (re)translations even if translated indiretcly from English to German to Swedish to finally Finnish. Members of the Digilang project Christophe Leblay, Maarit Koponen, Maarit Mutta, Anna Salmela, Leena Salmi & Mikko Suhonen showed examples of text editing process visualizations using tools such as GenographiX: for example, A2-level writers proceed straightforwardly while C2-level producers make loops as they write and edit different parts of the text at different times.

Maarit Mutta showed how writing processes can be visualized.

Annamari Korhonen suggested that because something always changes when a text is translated, translating is creative even with pragmatic texts. Tuuli Ahonen demonstrated how a translator cannot translate the whole film if one of the modes – picture, dialogue, music, or sound effects – is missing because the subtitles are part of the polysemiotic whole that the modes together make.

Minna Seppänen & Outi Paloposki discussed how in the early 19th-century Ancient Greek literature was translated into Finnish more to show off one’s language skills than to produce beautiful Finnish translations. The day concluded with the perspective of a professional translator: Jaakko Kankaanpää shared his observations on the differences, such as replacing racist vocaublary with politically correct terminology, between various Finnish (re)translations of Agatha Christie’s novels, including his own ones.

Text and photos: Laura Ivaska

Hamlet in Turku

Posted on by
Reply

The Department paid a visit to see Hamlet in the Turku City Theatre in March 2019. The production has garnered good reviews both by critics and audiences, and it was great to have an opportunity to see it, especially as the season is, alas, short.

SPOILER ALERT – what happens in Hamlet

If you like to keep up suspense, do not read further as I am about to give some spoilers. First of all, Hamlet’s father’s death turns out to have been murder by poison rather than an accidental snakebite. There are also other deaths: Ophelia, Polonius, and – in the end – practically everybody dies. (Not Horatio, though.)

This is good for the undertaker’s business – in the show presented in a very provoking, even thought-provoking way.

One of the most striking elements in the Turku Hamlet is the set. It combines traditional and contemporary elements in a very inventive way. In the programme booklet, the scenographer Markus Tsokkinen comments on the Finnish terms for building the set – ‘lavastaa’ and ‘kulissit’ – as derogatory terms for deception whereas he considers the set a way to enhance the truth elements of a play. Considering this, the amalgamation of old and new functions very well in bringing Shakespeare’s vision to us today.

Hamlet is one of the Bard’s big tragedies. In Finland it has been produced almost once in a decade after the first production in 1906, and it has been translated several times: by Paavo Cajander (1879), Yrjö Jylhä (1955), Lauri Sipari (1975), Eeva-Liisa Manner (1981), Veijo Meri (1982) and Matti Rossi (2013). The Turku Hamlet is based on Manner’s translation but with noticeable changes in the dialogue.

For a tragedy, Paavo Westerberg has direected a highly humorous – but in no way banal – version of Hamlet’s story. (Although Yorick might disagree.) It is multimedial, multilingual, intertextual, intermedial, intercultural – in short, multi-inter!

One of the most surprising things, personally, was Claudius. Eero Aho’s acting here was excellent, but Carl-Kristian Rundman as Polonius (very much like Gollum), Pia Andersson as Ophelia (rebel girl) and, especially, Jussi Nikkilä as Hamlet were even better. (Esko Salminen’s ghostly presence as Hamlet’s father’s ghost is also brilliant.)

To conclude, you would love to see the way they have done “To be or not to be” …

Text by Joel Kuortti
Photo by Otto-Ville Väätäinen/Turku City Theatre

Philologists in Edinburgh

Posted on by
Reply

The International Conference on English Historical Linguistics (ICEHL) was organised for the 20th time in Edinburgh on 27–30 August. The conference gathers together English scholars from around the world, studying English from Old to Late Modern.

Almost all of our researchers from the Philological Track made it to ICEHL. Matti Peikola, Mari-Liisa Varila, Hanna Salmi (currently at the University of Stockholm), Aino Liira, and Sirkku Ruokkeinen gave papers in the workshop “Paratextual Communication in a Historical Linguistic Perspective”, organised by Matti Peikola and Birte Bös (University of Duisburg-Essen). Matti Peikola and Peter Grund (University of Kansas) presented a paper on orthographical variation together with Johanna Rastas. Aleksi Mäkilähde gave a paper on the metatheory of pragmaphilology. Susanna Mäkinen gave a paper on references to fugitives in runaway slave notices. I gave a paper on the different translations of The Mirror of Alchemy. We were a busy lot!

This was my first ICEHL, but I hope it won’t be the last. The conference was packed astonishingly full of great papers and interesting discussions; the programme can be found here. I have never been to a conference with so many excellent papers on fascinating topics that were relevant for my own research. I was especially excited by papers on topics such as medieval Latin-English code-switching, spelling variation and standardisation in the early modern period, and multilingualism in late modern medical discourse.

Despite the busy academic programme, there was also time for social events. The conference ceilidh on Tuesday 28 August was especially memorable: it was wonderful to dance and to watch a crowd of other scholars skipping merrily along to the live traditional music. Lots of us also found time to climb up to Arthur’s Seat, the majestic hill right next to the conference location.

ICEHL also involved a final day of activities on Friday 31st August. Most of us Turku philologists – unsurprisingly – chose to go to Lindisfarne, the monastic Holy Island where the Anglo-Saxon Lindisfarne Gospels were produced. The weather was astoundingly warm and sunny; we had a glorious day trip filled with island beauty, the island’s old history, and clean sea wind. It was a fitting and excellent ending to a week’s worth of English historical linguistics.

Text by Sara Norja
Photo by Minna Nevala

Soup with Paul Auster

Posted on by
1


There is something surreal about eating the same soup as Paul Auster. All of a sudden, the intangible, enigmatic, almost disembodied author, whose books I read, whose films I watch and whose activities I follow in the media, is scooping mashed potatoes (and soup) on his plate (not the one that had the soup) at the “grubby little place” (his words, not mine) next to the House of the Estates in Helsinki and ranting enthusiastically about Beckett. Such encounters are, of course, one of the somewhat nerve-racking benefits of studying a living author.

At the turn of August and September 2017, the Finnish Society of Sciences and Letters organized a two-day seminar in honour of Finland’s centenary, titled Open Windows: Democracy, Censorship, Literature. As an avid defender of freedom of expression, a former Vice President of PEN America (2005-2007) and a member of its Board of Trustees (2004-2009), Paul Auster was a most suitable guest of honour.

The seminar begun with Professor Bo Pettersson interviewing Auster on, among other things, his latest novel 4 3 2 1. What struck me the most was the calm yet enthusiastic way Auster approached every question, the passion with which he engaged his work and life in general, the way his speech flowed as eloquently as his writing. I hadn’t really thought what he would be like, but in hindsight, he could not have been more Paul Auster.

The seminar continued with Auster reading passages from 4 3 2 1, but unfortunately he could not stay for the rest of the first day’s presentations. The five or so days he spent in Finland were packed with interviews and other engagements, and he further claimed that the one-month-nine-countries tour would be his last of the kind.


Auster did, however, return on the second day for a panel with the Finnish author Sirpa Kähkönen, pictured above with Auster. Towards the end of the discussion, Auster remarked along these lines:

      Writing a novel is a political act, even if the writer is not conscious of it. Novels are about ordinary lives; authors get to enter the lives of the most ordinary people in the most intimate ways. Literature and writing are, therefore, democratic acts, because even the smallest of lives matter. Literature is a defence against tyranny; in connecting the reader with those who are not yourself, literature creates and teaches empathy. Novels are democracy in action.

This manifesto was accompanied by applause, and I’m sure I witnessed a few in the audience discreetly dab tears from the corners of their eyes.

Text and photos by Ira Hansen

Ceremonial Conferment of Doctoral Degrees, 25-26 May 2017

Posted on by
Reply

Academic festivities are there for a reason: they help us remember that we are part of a long scholarly tradition which is our cultural and intellectual heritage. That is where we belong. Not to mention the fact that they are extremely fun and enjoyable! 136 young doctors and 12 honorary doctors participated in a two-day conferment ceremony at the University of Turku towards the end of May. Our department was involved in two important ways: Professor Kenneth Hyltenstam from the University of Stockholm, a prominent scholar who has published widely on bilingualism and SLA and who has had a strong impact on research conducted in our department, had been invited to receive the title of honorary doctor on our initiative, and our very own Mari-Liisa Varila was among the young doctors on whom the doctoral degree was conferred in the ceremony (see Mari-Liisa’s own words below).


Mari-Liisa Varila, Päivi Pietilä and Kenneth Hyltenstam celebrating at Turku Castle.

It must have felt like two rather hectic days for our esteemed honorary doctors. All practical arrangements had been planned carefully beforehand by the organizing committee, including a fitting session on the morning of the first day, to make sure the white tie was the right size (the dress code is notably very strict on these occasions!), and transportation from the hotel to the various events and back again. The events consisted of a rehearsal at the Concert Hall, a sword-sharpening ceremony on the eve of the big day, the conferment ceremony itself, an academic procession from the Concert Hall to the Cathedral, a service at the Cathedral, a banquet at Turku Castle in the evening, and finally a ball at the Turku VPK House. In earlier years, the festivities went on even longer, as there was a boat trip to Naantali and lunch at Kaivohuone. Maybe it is not such a bad thing that the programme has been cut slightly; it is rather exhausting to be festive for two entire days, let alone three! But on the other hand, the two days were thoroughly enjoyable, and even the weather was better than anyone could have wished for: sunshine and a bright blue sky.

Text by Päivi Pietilä

The doctor in the hat

My doctoral degree was awarded already in June 2016, but the ceremonial conferment of doctoral degrees is only organised once every two or three years. To officially receive my hat, sword, and doctoral diploma, I participated in the festivities this year. It is not obligatory to take part in the ceremonial conferment, but I felt that it was a good way to stop for a moment and celebrate my achievement together with the other young doctors, the honorary doctors, and our academic community.


In the rehearsal on Thursday afternoon, we practised solemnly walking in pairs, receiving the sword, and bowing to the conferrer without dropping our hats. Excitement filled the air. In the sword-sharpening ceremony on Thursday evening, we symbolically honed our blades for the big day. Our avecs turned the grindstones while the heralds poured some bubbly on the swords.


Mari-Liisa Varila receiving her sword.

On Friday noon we gathered to the Concert Hall, all in tailcoats or long black dresses. At quarter past twelve, the procession entered the hall. We sat down in the front of the room, waiting for our turn to receive the hat and sword. Each conferrer stepped up to the podium in their turn, delivering their trilingual speech – Finnish, English, and Latin. They pressed the hats on our heads and presented us with our swords and (Latin) diplomas. After the ceremony, our procession moved from the Concert Hall to the Cathedral where a bilingual service was held. Our day was made even more special by the beautiful singing of the Turku University Choir.

In the evening, we gathered to the Turku Castle. We were served a three-course dinner, interspersed with speeches and some more singing. I was honoured to have been asked to deliver the speech to the honorary doctors. We then moved to the VPK house for a polonaise and a waltz, with music provided by Sohon Torwet. Our evening ended, very appropriately, in a speech to the sun.

Text by Mari-Liisa Varila
Photos by Miikka Varila and Markku Hakala