This article introduces the reader to current work at the intersection of classical studies and the public humanities. It begins from the observation that in recent years, efforts by classical scholars to relate to a wider public have intensified and taken on a new quality. Not so long ago, public-facing research was considered detrimental to “real” scholarship. By contrast, as this article sets out to show, there is now a growing interest in a true exchange of perspectives, knowledges, and methodologies with stakeholders outside of the confines of the academe. I argue that some of the most interesting work in this space emerges from the way in which the aims and objectives of the public humanities intersect with several trends currently driving classical studies. These include the emergence of the digital humanities, the maturing of classical reception studies, and the (often difficult) conversations around calls to “decolonize” the classics.

This article argues that a public education in method—specifically, close reading—is the only viable role for literary studies within the public humanities. Drawing on recent discussions about the uses of the public humanities—and setting itself against recent interventions that have proclaimed a different public role for public literary studies—this article takes the form of an overt but minimalist manifesto: it tries to make the minimal case for public literary studies that is sufficient to give it a public usefulness. In so doing, it breaks down previous efforts of understanding the utility of literary studies as related to literature’s utility, but also to large-scale interventionist ideals such as climate-change activism. It proposes close reading as training in public debate, as an exercise towards better public meaning-making, and thus as a signal contribution to the making of better democratic citizens in a deliberative public sphere.

Some humanities fields, understanding the growing importance and relevance of public work, have been relatively quick to incorporate teaching public work into their courses. But the arts have been slow to catch up, for example, the relatively recent fields of public musicology and public music theory. However, teaching students how to do public work and why it is important is often removed in favor of course coverage. The reality is that teaching students to do public-facing work can enhance a course’s coverage while also teaching valuable workforce skills, in or out of the arts. At a time when applied careers in the performing and visual arts are dwindling, it is crucial to include the pedagogy of public-facing work in one’s arts classroom to show students what careers are possible using their disciplinary knowledge. In this manifesto, I discuss the importance of teaching public arts methods with a view from my own field, public musicology. As a case study, I will show how teaching public musicology can be both incorporated into stand-alone courses and built into programs, as I have done in the only public musicology undergraduate program in the United States.

The performing arts are, by definition, a public enterprise. Public Humanities are invested in sharing information publicly, reliably, and making it easy to find. Music, dance, theatre, and live art each have their own disciplinary methods and theories that do not necessarily align with those in the humanities. This essay explores how public works and public history projects can intersect with the performing arts. I posit that principles from the performing arts can be applied to public-facing work in the humanities and other disciplines. I detail seven key components of performing arts research and art-making and demonstrate how they can apply to Public Humanities.

This article examines the paradox of the humanities: they are simultaneously denigrated while non-humanities disciplines utilize (and champion) the very skills that are considered uniquely cultivated by a humanities education. My examination reveals that with the fissure between the humanities and other disciplines, knowledge about what the humanities do—and thus contribute to education in other fields—continues to diminish, furthering the cycle of marginalizing the humanities while also benefitting from them without attribution. I consider a time when a humanities education explicitly played a crucial role in the development of leaders, especially in business, because of the role the humanities played in the cultivation of analytical skills and the development of good judgement. I use this examination to consider what this lost connection means not only for the development of leaders but also for realizing the significant role that the humanities play across the professions and in our universities. The pedagogical role of the humanities in its development of analytical ability and judgment is crucial to public life from the flourishing of the business world to the lives we lead living with each other as fellow citizens.

In this article, we present the field of public history, which we define as a process of making history more accessible, participatory, and connected to present-day public engagement with the past. In particular, we discuss how public history invites and develops interdisciplinary collaboration, such as between history and art. We also present the reasons, the practices, and the challenges of co-producing historical projects with non-professional members of the public. As a new paradigm, public history questions and reinvents the role of professional historians who share authority with other actors of the history-making process. We flesh out our arguments with examples from recent public history projects we developed in Luxembourg in 2024.

The practice of anthropology is based on the ethnographer “being there” in time and space. And the act of writing is the reenactment of “presence” for the reader. “The field” is a romanticized space for empirical exploration. However, technological innovation and connectivity have enabled easy access to new “fieldsites” and vicarious participant-observation without being “present.” The entertainment media ecosystem is now more heterogeneous than ever and is more relevant in everyday life. The depth with which we immerse ourselves in these imaginary worlds speaks volumes about our withdrawal from other forms of engagement with the people, communities, and social problems around us. Romance and fantasy are a means to escape vulnerability and hopelessness, as well as serving as an outlet for the frustrations of failed social mobility. This essay posits that romance is a method for living today, and enjoyment is empiricism for a public anthropology. Romance is more than a genre; it is a guide to understanding how society functions. There is something deeply human about living through our imaginations to escape our present. Enjoying romance as a method to engage with the world offers insight into political infrastructures, social hierarchies, and elite intrigue. Life is full of afflictions, and romance is more than a salve; it offers a strategy for navigating social relations.

What is the value of public philosophy? “Philosopher-first” accounts suggest that the ideas that academic philosophers produce can, when disseminated, be useful to the wider public. However, such accounts assume that there is a gap between the interests and activities of professional philosophers and those of the wider public, which must be overcome by translating philosophy into more accessible terms. This article offers an alternative account—the “public-first” account. On this account, philosophy is a necessary part of everyday life. Each of us relies upon a background of conceptual resources that shape our interpretations, expectations, and behaviours in the world. Professional philosophers might be useful in analysing, maintaining, and fixing our conceptual infrastructure. However, there is no gap between philosophy and everyday life, which must be overcome. Whilst most defences of public philosophy argue that it is beneficial to the public, on the “public-first” account, public philosophy is also vital for the discipline of philosophy itself. If philosophers want to adequately evaluate their philosophical theories, they must appeal to a much wider and more diverse range of human experience than that of professional philosophers themselves. As such, public philosophy is necessary for properly conducted philosophical inquiry.