next »

[meagain]

The question below comes from a series of threads (Dull, Dull Humanities Scholarship; What you Wish You Knew, pt. II; Bad Advisors; and others) that got me thinking: 

If you had 3-4 years to work with, with a low teaching load (1/2), no real publication pressure and absolute freedom to pursue any research topic you choose, what would you do?  More specifically, what will be attractive to search committees in 2012?  Seriously.

One caveat.  The topic must fit into a social science or humanities field, somehow. 

OK, two caveats.  The topic must also avoid the dreadful and dull humanities scholarship described in another thread (not that all Humanities scholarship is dull...just the dull stuff!).

I've paid my dues for a few years and now I have this great opportunity for scholarly reinvention.  I can't tell if my paralysis is more akin to Hamlet's or Jack-the-Dreamer's (an obscure reference for all of you bored Humanities scholars).   

I suspect two reactions to this post will be:

1.  Hey Porter, why would I tell you?  (Fair enough.  But, why wouldn't you?  If the topic is important enough to warrant the interest of a number of search committees it should bear the scrutiny of one more scholar, right?)
2.  There is no way to tell.  (Probably true, but depressing.  I mean, a community of one or two thousand scholars ought to have some idea about the important questions around which future scholarship will revolve.  If this is the case...Jeez, if this is the case then no wonder Humanities scholarship can be so dull.)



So, what to do?  Environmental policy?  Constitutionalism?  The dietary habits of I. K. Powersly?  Pirates (just kidding)?  MMORPGs?  Economics of billiard halls?  How to start a revolution?  So many, too many options.  How does one decide? 

[helpful]

It depends on who the next president of the U.S. will be.

[meagain]

It depends on who the next president of the U.S. will be.

Clinton.  Now, 'fess up.

[algoa]

I suppose you have not googled "2012."
According to some sources we are to have a spectacular year.

[meagain]

I suppose you have not googled "2012."
According to some sources we are to have a spectacular year.

I did google 2012.  I came across an interesting headline: Humanities "Scholars" Discover They Have Nothing Important to Say.  The sub-head read Higher Education a Series of "Pet Projects" Say Critics".

News outlets still use awful grammar in 4 years.

I guess the best bet is to tap into the existing network by writing yet another tract about Nietzsche or Foucault.  I hear Proust is hot.  Also, Bergson.   

[helpful]

It depends on who the next president of the U.S. will be.

Clinton.  Now, 'fess up.

Post-feminism.

[iomhaigh]

I suppose you have not googled "2012."
According to some sources we are to have a spectacular year.

I did google 2012.  I came across an interesting headline: Humanities "Scholars" Discover They Have Nothing Important to Say.  The sub-head read Higher Education a Series of "Pet Projects" Say Critics".

News outlets still use awful grammar in 4 years.

I guess the best bet is to tap into the existing network by writing yet another tract about Nietzsche or Foucault.  I hear Proust is hot.  Also, Bergson.   

Dang, you scooped my good one.

I guess I'll have to write about pirates after all. 

[scheherazade]

I can't understand why you all consider pirates a poor topic.  There isn't nearly enough serious scholarship on pirates, and all the prepubescents that devoured the "Pirates of the Caribbean" movies will be just entering college with a thirst for all the pirate knowledge upon which they can lay their pampered little hands.  Pirates are the Next Big Thing, especially research on Middle Eastern pirates.  Those of you dismissing such an important topic are clearly short-sighted and should immediately leave academe.  Please post your job openings to the fora.

[donstefano]

check with hollywood. The hot thing in 2012 will be something they had a movie on in 2011. Suddenly, all the kids will want to study this, and government officials will want to fund research on it (we've seen it with dinosaurs, and with climate change)

I'd go for studying something that interests you, and just continue with it no matter what te market is. You'll be very likely to be fashionable at least once in your career like that

[normative_]

Comparative Occupation Studies

This interdisciplinary course teaches the finer points of acquiring, holding and ruling foreign territories. The importance of convincing resident populations of the benefits of foreign rule and adapting the strategy to disparate cultures will be stressed, drawing on anthropology, sociology and institutional engineering (political science) studies.

I have another one, but I'm saving it for me...  :o)

[lodore66]

My guess is that it will be something that incorporates scientific research into the biological basis of culture and a humanities-inspired study of this same culture.  The various poststructuralist and postmodernist approaches are really starting to wear a little thin, and in any event, it's becoming more and more evident that they are becoming less and less justifiable on empirical grounds.  So goodbye to Jacques no.s 1 and 2 (come on, did anybody really enjoy reading them?) and their various hangers on.    Even Foucault, who always seemed to be the best of that lot, is coming under severe scrutiny from professional historians.  (Try making his claims in an undergrad history essay and delectate on the bright shiny fail you'll be awarded.)

As it stands, the emergence of cognitivism and Darwinism in the humanities points towards the direction things are taking.  Both have their problems, undoubtedly, but with some refinement my guess is that we'll be hearing a lot more about them in 2012.  To sum up, my best guess is that we'll see a return to the quasi-positivist attitude associated with structuralism in the 1950s and 60s, though this time it will hopefully lead somewhere. 

[donstefano]

too late, normative. The first wave of books on this topic is coming out already, and there even was a new journal launched on this recently (yes, interdisciplinary). Hey, even I am considering to write something on this. The hype will be over in 2012. And actually, it's a reemergence of a previous wave of studies in the 1960s...

[normative_]

good job it's not my field then <grin>

[cogscientist]

My guess is that it will be something that incorporates scientific research into the biological basis of culture and a humanities-inspired study of this same culture.  The various poststructuralist and postmodernist approaches are really starting to wear a little thin, and in any event, it's becoming more and more evident that they are becoming less and less justifiable on empirical grounds.  So goodbye to Jacques no.s 1 and 2 (come on, did anybody really enjoy reading them?) and their various hangers on.    Even Foucault, who always seemed to be the best of that lot, is coming under severe scrutiny from professional historians.  (Try making his claims in an undergrad history essay and delectate on the bright shiny fail you'll be awarded.)

As it stands, the emergence of cognitivism and Darwinism in the humanities points towards the direction things are taking.  Both have their problems, undoubtedly, but with some refinement my guess is that we'll be hearing a lot more about them in 2012.  To sum up, my best guess is that we'll see a return to the quasi-positivist attitude associated with structuralism in the 1950s and 60s, though this time it will hopefully lead somewhere. 

You can't imagine how delighted I am to read that. I do hope to have something to say about these issues in 2012.

[lodore66]

You can't imagine how delighted I am to read that. I do hope to have something to say about these issues in 2012.

Hi cogscientist -- I'm glad you're glad; the task now is to make it happen!

Incidentally, a great read about how someone woke from the dogmatic slumber of Lacanian psychoanalysis is Dylan Evan's (the author of A Dictionary of Lacanian Psychoanalysis) essay in Gottschall and Wilson's book The Literary Animal. Parts of the book aren't great (though some are), but I thoroughly recommend taking a read of that particular essay.