Jump to content

lifealive

Members
  • Content Count

    170
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

lifealive last won the day on August 9 2016

lifealive had the most liked content!

About lifealive

  • Rank
    Latte

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Application Season
    Not Applicable
  • Program
    Unemployed PhD

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. As I thought was evident in my original post (but I guess not, and I should have taken more time to explain), this went beyond simply putting a bumper sticker on a car and admitting that you voted for a Republican. I've known plenty of more conservative grad students; few of them derailed discussions in class to make somewhat tasteless comparisons between Native Americans and the "natives" of Benghazi, or sent messages to the graduate student listserv gloating about election returns in certain districts. Really, no one cares about your political views if you're not aggressive about them. Like
  2. No, it has nothing to do with the job market and everything to do with the trolling. Trolling sets me off any day of the week, especially when that trolling blames the humanities' lack of funding on its failure to accommodate a particular political agenda. But anyway, sorry for the snark. I'll curb it from now on.
  3. It was a fair effort at trolling, but luckily it didn't go anywhere. 5/10 for mentioning a theorist that no one's discussed since the 1990s; 6/10 for invoking political relativism as something that people in the academy should aspire to (in a seminar no less); 7/10 for passive-aggressive, MRA-style "I'm too cool to really be invested in this discussion" rhetoric; 4/10 for transparently invoking the "I'm not a _____, but ...." 3/10 for accidentally flashing your hateboner for all things literary "politics" on a literary study message board; 2/10 for backpedaling on th
  4. Thank you for schooling me in my own job market, rising_star. You're right--my failure to get a TT job (which, by the way, does not make me unusual, and I came quite close for a few different jobs this year) is because I lack the ability to adequately market myself for different kinds of jobs. I lack the ability to see that a 4/4 load at a comprehensive college will require teaching, and therefore I put my research letter forward, which emphasizes nothing but my postdoctoral research, forthcoming book, and published articles. For research jobs, I talk endlessly about how I love teaching c
  5. Are your friends representative of all hires out there? Are they even in English? I never said that teaching completely unimportant for getting hired at certain SLACs. Only that the common knowledge--that SLACs are all about teaching, except for the very top ones--no longer holds true in many searches. To repeat: the job market is competitive enough that many schools that were previously considered "teaching oriented" are now looking for different candidates. And much of it is coming from the ground up: promising candidates get hired by SLACs, they turn around and chair search committees a
  6. Nice troll bait. But not all political views are created equal. And if you'd actually included the rest of my passage, you'd have had to confront the fact that this person was obnoxious and aggressive about his views, which turned people off. And no, we did not sit around talking about your hero Romney in the same way he talked about Obama. We had more important things to do, like talking about what we'd actually read that day, for class.
  7. I don't know if I fully understand the point about identity politics. As to your point about servility: I think appropriate deference is part of it. I also think that academia has an obsession with people who look like they don't work very hard (or work very hard at the wrong things, i.e. teaching or landing a job) or want something too badly. Not to be too tongue-in-cheek, but it harks back to an old-boy system of wealth and privilege where the sons of the WASPy upper class simply told their school masters what Ivy League school they wanted to attend, and it was done. The privileged need
  8. Oh, you'll be fine then. Now you've left me wondering who this guy is, though.
  9. I agree with echo449 in that approach is going to matter here. I have seen people get burned in programs because of political disagreements--not because of politics, necessarily, but because they advertised those politics far and wide and were obnoxious/aggressive about them. (The best example that comes to mind is a guy who, during an election year, slapped a Republican bumper sticker on his car and actually spoke about "Obamacare" and "Obama's idiocy" in seminar. He got terrible grades from that professor and the next year was asked to leave the program. I don't know if one thing actually ha
  10. This is just flat-out wrong. First of all, the job market has tightened to the point where small liberal arts colleges can and do command the best and most elite job applicants possible. That's not just the top 25 to 40 programs anymore; that's more like the top 100, maybe 150. It's why you get SLACs far outside of the Oberlin 50 looking for candidates who have a research profile. They might want people who can teach--sure, all schools say they do. But they mostly want people who look good to the outside. Even students at St. Mary's College and Wittenberg University are paying out the nose
  11. I apologize for misinterpreting the reason for the outrage of your original message. Yes, it is outrageous that a university would allow someone to defer for two years and use an adjunct (but more likely a VAP, considering the caliber of this type of institution) in their place. Quite simply, the "winner takes all" approach goes far in academia because academia looks to other institutions for validation. Being able to hire a professor who was sought-out enough to juggle multiple offers is a way to validate your department and to know for sure that you got someone good. Never mind the fact
  12. I didn't "jump all over" you, rising_star. I merely questioned why you were niggling over a rather minor point when the larger issue is that academic hiring practices replicate institutional privilege. I personally don't agree that taking a job is trampling over the prospects of another or cheating someone--it's more like cashing in on systems of privilege--but that's not really the bigger issue, is it. Changing the subject--i.e. emphasizing a poster's naivete and outrage over common hiring practices--is derailing, as far as I'm concerned. If you don't have anything constructive to contri
  13. Why does it matter, rising_star? Does fancypants09's naivete excuse the larger abuses of the academia labor market? In other words: what's your purpose here?
  14. The academic market is generally like the economy at large: there will always be that top 1% that is immune to all recessions. https://chroniclevitae.com/news/929-academia-s-1-percent I actually know someone like the person you're describing--postdoc at an Ivy League school, job lined up afterwards at one of the top 15 universities in the country. That job is sitting empty right now. If it's any comfort, though, it doesn't require much teaching anyway, so I doubt that any adjuncts have been hired to take on the onerous 1-1 course load. Quite simply: it's an outrage becaus
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.