next »

[sugaree]

Airball, it sounds like you've already found a solution but I wanted to add my support for your thoughtful decision. It's one thing to drop the F-bomb if your research is on racial tensions in modern L.A. and your primary source material are lyrics from NWA's "Straight Outta Compton." But with a topic broad enough like sexuality and popular culture, I imagine you can (and it looks like you have) make different decisions about what to include and what to leave out of this particular presentation.

That's not to say I think you should water down your research, but I recall (way back when I was in grad school, forever ago) how a candidate researching radical 1960s activism swore up a storm. All choices were from hu's sources, of course, but no one was particularly impressed by it (and this was a fairly liberal R1 public school).

[redding]

In (my one and only; I got the job) job talk, I had occasion to play some recent popular music (Imagine the Straight Outta Compton example above).  I was sure I had vetted the songs carefully ahead of time, but apparently I missed one N-word.  I realized it in the moment and heroically Dj-ed the volume during the one second when the word was uttered.  The students (who all knew the song) thought it was hilarious and chuckled among themselves, and the faculty had no clue.  I think this was a great way to play it in this case, even if it was accidental.

I'm not sure what I'd do with the f-bomb.  I certainly teach it, but it's not essential to my research.  I'd probably keep it, but with some serious preparation if it were really important.

[airball]

I've been thinking about the "If they want you to censor your research, you don't want to work there." line of thought.

I'm not worried that the entire department would object. I'm worried that the elderly gentleman in the back would be offended, and openly or covertly torpedo my candidacy as a result.

The first step towards getting the job is not losing the job.

airball

[civilwarrior]

NO, do not do it.  Why? Because there is almost always someone in the dept/SC who has another candidate in mind. They will use this to say you are "unprofessional." Never give them any ammunition.

[yellowtractor]

I've been thinking about the "If they want you to censor your research, you don't want to work there." line of thought.

I'm not worried that the entire department would object. I'm worried that the elderly gentleman in the back would be offended, and openly or covertly torpedo my candidacy as a result.

The first step towards getting the job is not losing the job.

True enough.  If you're lucky, though, the elderly gentleman in the back row will be a little deaf.

Good luck, by the way.

[kedves]

I haven't had this problem, although I have found that reading interview quotations in a talk is tricky because my voice and persona become blended with the interview participant's.  But I think there is a big difference between hearing a talk and reading an article.  I've read many articles that contained horrific interview material, profanity included but the most troubling part being the context.   To hear someone speak that material in a room I could not leave would not be at all similar.  For me, the F word is not the worst word, but if you can avoid it, I think you can do so without fearing censorship in research. 

Aside from wanting to avoid offending the elderly gentleman, I wouldn't want to seem to be trying for some sort of faux hipness or to give the appearance of lacking excellent judgment.

Good luck, Airball!  Let us know how it goes.

[canadatourismguy]

Some people are indeed quite prudish.  Some people really get hung up on words and forget the broader content of their use.  Play it safe at this point.  When your tenured - have it at all you want.

CTG

[profperf]

For me, it is all about context.  If you are talking about Allen Ginsburg, then some quoted lines including sexually explicit language and imagery would seem to make sense.  On the other hand, I remember a job candidate, more than ten years ago, who, after presenting his material fairly quickly, said, "Well, I guess I shot my wad."  Ick. 

[kedves]

For me, it is all about context.  If you are talking about Allen Ginsburg, then some quoted lines including sexually explicit language and imagery would seem to make sense.  On the other hand, I remember a job candidate, more than ten years ago, who, after presenting his material fairly quickly, said, "Well, I guess I shot my wad."  Ick. 

Oh, man.  Ick is right. 

Welcome!

[yellowtractor]

If you were presenting on Allen Ginsberg, and you spelled his name "Allen Ginsburg" in any of your job talk materials, we would be moving on to the next candidate right now.

Welcome likewise.  I don't mean to snark, but I couldn't quite let this one go.  Sorry.

[david_perlmutter]

OP: Consider this. The faculty and SC may not all be initimate with your research. Some of them may show up to presentations only knowing your name, or even just that a candidate is speaking. Do you want to go down in local legend as the person who screened an XXX film to a G crowd? Also, it only takes one angry SC member to veto your candidacy. Why take the risk? In this job market?