Part of the problem with the discussion on Friday November 5th was that we
were trying to discuss a "center" that has no geographical or disciplinary
center.  I wanted to mention the only other model I have for this, which is
the Center for Literature, Language and Culture (CLLC) at Emory University.
I was head of this "center" for a year, but it quite deliberately had no
institutional structure, office or proecudres - it was supposed to operate
outside the usual academic units.  Its mandate was to promotoe dialogue
across the disciplines - as such it did the following:

1) Created a database of faculty areas of research and then matched people
according to areas of interest and sent out invitations to "faculty lunches"
- at these lunches people discussed their work. The CLLC paid for the lunch.

2) Brought in outside speakers from the Atlanta area and beyond

2) Organized one day colloquia - I organized one my year as head on "The
Politics of the Academy"

Some of these activities might be appropriate for UTA's new Centre.  The big
differnece right now is that the CLLC had a large annual budget and the
Centre for Theory as yet has none.

Martin