next »

[eddyman]

Is there a point to these kind of articles on the CHE website?  http://chronicle.com/article/When-Itll-Never-Be-a-Good-Fit/128531/

Much more of a snowflake than any of my students.

[erzuliefreda]

Wow. She makes me ashamed to be a historian of contemporary American culture. But hey, she's a lecturer and a "consultant" now, so at least she didn't end up with one of those terrible lesser TT positions.

[jonesey]

But I think she makes a few good points, namely, that if you can't stand certain parts of the country, don't waste your time (and the SC's) by applying/interviewing there. 

Candidates are told they need to be "geographically flexible" for a TT job, but if they're die hard urban liberals the odds are they won't like most places in the Deep South, for example.  Better they chose where to apply wisely than take a job somewhere they'll hate.

[erzuliefreda]

But I think she makes a few good points, namely, that if you can't stand certain parts of the country, don't waste your time (and the SC's) by applying/interviewing there. 

Candidates are told they need to be "geographically flexible" for a TT job, but if they're die hard urban liberals the odds are they won't like most places in the Deep South, for example.  Better they chose where to apply wisely than take a job somewhere they'll hate.

Sort of. But I think one's odds are better of publishing out of a lousy-fit location than from an endless string of lectureships. It depends on how badly you want a TT job as a historian, and what you are willing to sacrifice to get it.

[euro_trash]

I would prefer the sticks to some of the elitist places I have seen in England where they eat their sandwiches with silverware.  Yuck.

[jonesey]

But I think she makes a few good points, namely, that if you can't stand certain parts of the country, don't waste your time (and the SC's) by applying/interviewing there. 

Candidates are told they need to be "geographically flexible" for a TT job, but if they're die hard urban liberals the odds are they won't like most places in the Deep South, for example.  Better they chose where to apply wisely than take a job somewhere they'll hate.

Sort of. But I think one's odds are better of publishing out of a lousy-fit location than from an endless string of lectureships. It depends on how badly you want a TT job as a historian, and what you are willing to sacrifice to get it.

I think the key point of her article is this:

I went to graduate school to enhance my life, develop my intellect, and share a larger part of the world. I did not go to graduate school to end up teaching the same four courses for 30 years, trapped in a dead-end job in a town I did not like.

I think most grad students feel this way, and why there's such culture shock when they go on the job market. 

[eddyman]

But I think she makes a few good points, namely, that if you can't stand certain parts of the country, don't waste your time (and the SC's) by applying/interviewing there. 

Candidates are told they need to be "geographically flexible" for a TT job, but if they're die hard urban liberals the odds are they won't like most places in the Deep South, for example.  Better they chose where to apply wisely than take a job somewhere they'll hate.

The point is good.  It should be blindingly obvious. But apparently it is not for people like the author.  But even if the point is good, I don't really see the need for the long story.  I know most web commentary these days isn't much more than navel-gazing but c'mon this was a caricature of rural life by someone quite unaware of the world around them. 

[theblondeassassin]

I would prefer the sticks to some of the elitist places I have seen in England where they eat their sandwiches with silverware.  Yuck.

Silverplate will do in a pinch or if dining al fresco, but  finding oneself eating a sandwich with stainless steel cutlery would really indicate one was on one's uppers.

[pooksocket]

Yes, the point--google before you go--is important. Then you won't be so startled at the lack of a world-class orchestra.

But there is more to the loathing such oh-you-poor-darlin' writing inspires. This was "a caricature of rural life by someone quite unaware of the world around them," but a "historian of contemporary culture" wrote it (albeit one who appear to think that the ironic deployment of "snazzy" = "contemporary"). On the basis of a four-hour train ride (okay, maybe the ride back, too) she decided that every "elitist" cliche about middle America Hollywood has ever deployed is "fairly accurate." Jeez.

I think she thinks that her writing is cute, but it makes me want to pinch her HARD.   

[merinoblue]

The larger issue raised by her piece--the elephant in the room--is that the academic job market is limited. If you insist on putting yourself only on the academic job market, you're going to find your pickings are slim to non-existent. If you want to have some choice in where you live, what size of organization you work for, and even the kinds of people you call your co-workers, put yourself on the non-academic job market as well. I don't think anyone should be going through a PhD programme any more without being prepared to conduct a dual job search when they exit.

[scienceprof]

She states that she had " no access to culture" there.  Someone in an appropriate field correct me if I am wrong, but I though culture exists everywhere people exist.  Who doesn't know the definition of culture, me or this "cultural historian"?

[aprilmay]

She states that she had " no access to culture" there.  Someone in an appropriate field correct me if I am wrong, but I though culture exists everywhere people exist.  Who doesn't know the definition of culture, me or this "cultural historian"?

Chime. By "culture" she means "things I value" or more likely "things I think make me seem smart" so everything else is worthless. I am disappointed that the Chronicle published such snobbery. Interestingly, although she is writing that she is smarter than the people in this town and would not want to be around them, I find her to be idiotic and the type of person I would not want to be near. Did she actually publish this under her real name?

[tenured_feminist]

She states that she had " no access to culture" there.  Someone in an appropriate field correct me if I am wrong, but I though culture exists everywhere people exist.  Who doesn't know the definition of culture, me or this "cultural historian"?

Her Ph.D. granting institution should retroactively fail her on her comps for this article.

[dolljepopp]

I thought she was being deliberately hyperbolic in a massively tone-deaf attempt to be funny.

I do think that recognising "I'm not cut out to live the rest of my working career in an area that lacks certain things I value (or is too hot or too cold)" is valid. On some level it's not that different than recognising one would be a better fit at an SLAC than an R2.

But there is never a reason to be an arrogant condescending prat -- especially when looking for a job in a bad economy.

I mean, I don't want to live in (my own definition of) the middle of nowhere either, but I'd have the grace (I hope) not to write a such public rubbish about it.
 

[madhatter]

But there is never a reason to be an arrogant condescending prat -- especially when looking for a job in a bad economy.

I mean, I don't want to live in (my own definition of) the middle of nowhere either, but I'd have the grace (I hope) not to write a such public rubbish about it.

Exactly.

This is my favorite sentence from the article:

It was clear to me that those people were really isolated from civilization out there, because no civilized people I knew asked questions about genocide before 9 a.m.—over bacon, no less.

What is the appropriate meal for a discussion of genocide? And do you need special utensils for it?