Advice on converting 30-pg paper to conference presentation

[surefire]

Hi all,

 

I would love some advice, if people are feeling willing and able! I'm presenting at a national conference in two weeks and am trying to put together a conference presentation based on a 30-page paper that I wrote a few months ago. There are quite a few first-time presenters attending this conference, so my department has actually organized a "mock" panel to allow for an opportunity for us to present what we've got to them and to get some feedback. It's really a very nice idea, but it's set for this Thursday and it's stressing me out! I feel more nervous about the prospect of presenting to my own faculty/colleagues than at the actual conference, which is an apprehension that I didn't anticipate...

 

I sat down today to write the presentation, but I'm having a hard go of it. The paper is really heavy on the theory, and accordingly, much of the interpretation was painstakingly crafted and stated JUST SO. I found it difficult to re-invision and re-write from scratch, so I sort of ended up just whittling down the 30 pages to 20. I'm probably going to remove one thread of the argument entirely to get it down to a crisper, more focused 15 pages. Also, I'll probably throw together a Prezi to hopefully highlight and give coherency to some of the main parts. But, I'm concerned that I didn't write a "new" paper for the presentation based on the term paper so much as I just, converted it, I guess. Is this copaestetic? What are other people's experiences? I will have some time to amend the presentation for the actual conference, but as I said, I'm seized by some doubt concerning my "mock" presentation this Thursday: Am I going to look like a jerk?

 

Any advice or anecdotes are appreciated! Thank you!

[somethinbruin]

I have taken longer papers and turned them into conference presentations, although I'm in a different field than yours (English lit) so YMMV with regard to my advice. It's not a huge issue to not "re-write" the whole paper, but that's pretty much what I had to do with mine because of time constraints. The thesis/thoughts are the same, but since writing and presenting are so different, it inevitably requires a different rhetorical approach to suit the situation. 

 

The first real question I would have for you is what are the time constraints this presentation is operating under? Generally conferences limit you to 15-20 minutes, and if that's the case you've still got a pretty long way to go. A 15 minute presentation is about 7-8 double-spaced pages since most people can read/deliver a page in about two minutes.

 

The second question is what can you eliminate as ancillary? What will your audience generally know since they share your field? Your paper may be theory heavy, but since your audience is high-level, you may not have to delve as deeply into it as you think. What is your core argument? I think you've already identified one ancillary argument that can be left out of the presentation. That's good. Most of your work is going to require stripping away ancillary material, which is never easy because we are emotionally invested in our work and our writing. Faulkner said "In writing, you must kill all your darlings" and I've never found that more true than when reworking a paper. You've got to recognize that you love it, then recognize that it doesn't work for what you need in its current form, then kill it and bring it back to life as something else. 

 

When I have taken longer papers and reworked them for conferences, I've always started by writing an abstract. Most literature conferences require them for the proposal anyway, so I've found them a good place to start. Sell your paper to yourself in 200 words. That way you're working from something small, rather than looking at this daunting 30 page document that you have to cut by 75%. The abstract boils down your paper to its core argument. Then it's easier to build it back up.

 

After I've got the abstract, I ask myself what is the essential information that forms the linchpin. I jot down a few notes/quick list of what these areas/sections are. What absolutely, positively cannot be cut? Open a new document on your computer, and put the new abstract at the top. Then copy and paste the key paragraphs from those indispensable sections from the old paper into the new presentation. This will look rough, but it will give you a place to start. The challenge then becomes fitting these sections together by filling in the gaps, but at least with this method you've stripped away most of the 30-page paper, distilled it to its core essence and into something that you can start to refashion into your final presentation.

 

Also, don't be too worried about presenting in front of the "home crowd." It will be worth it because, in the end, whatever questions you might get can be used to strengthen your presentation before you ultimately deliver it at the conference. I recommend taking a legal pad and pen up with you so that you can jot down questions and notes for later. When I've done dry runs with faculty, they've always been very gracious, helpful and thought provoking. No one expects you to be as good as a professor with tenure. They know you're a grad student just starting out, and they appreciate that you're taking your first halting steps into professionalization. It is natural to be self-conscious about presenting, but I wouldn't worry too much about running a draft past faculty. They're there to help you, not to put you in front of a firing squad.

 

Good luck refashioning your paper! I'm sure you'll be great.