Well, in that case I won't deny the denizens of Unfogged the chance to opine. I'm a senior in high school and I have to decide where to get my undergraduate degree within the week. Is prestige worth the debt?
It is also probably important to note that I could go to Minnesota debt-free. I'm a National Merit Scholar and have a perfect ACT, which is probably not so important but makes me feel special.
Debt principal over four years is about $94000 at Carnegie Mellon, $74000 at Wellesley, $26000 at Tulane, $12000 at Iowa, and $0 at Minnesota.
I've been admitted to liberal arts programs at all of the above-named institutions, plus the College of Science at CMU and the Institute of Technology at Minnesota.
I've been sort of leaning toward economics/finance/pure math. Ish. And I assume I'll change my mind at some point.
The NYT had an article about life at big big big state schools, though the worries brought up can almost certainly be circumvented if you're disciplined, go to office hours, make an effort to do work, etc.
Ok, this is one guy's opinion, obviously, and other people will weigh in, but debt of the kind involved at Mellon and Wellesley is never worthwhile. It seems abstract when you're starting school, but take it from a guy in his thirties who is still paying it off: it affects your life for years and years, and seriously narrows the range of things you can do. Not worth it.
Of the remaining three, to my mind, there isn't an appreciable difference in prestige between them, so I don't see, absent new information, why you'd choose Tulane, because $26,000 is still pretty steep.
That leaves Iowa and Minnesota, which are both big state schools, and both quite good. If I were making the decision, it would be about whether putting up with Minnesota's weather is worth $12,000 (not that Iowa is Miami). But there must be other considerations for you. Do you know anyone at either school? Do you know, even by reputation, any professors there? Etc.
The short answer though, is this: getting out of school debt-free is a wonderful and enviable position to be in, and you've done good by earning the chance. Minnesota is a good school, and the Twin Cities are actually quite nice. Unless the thought of Minnesota's winters is unbearable to you, it seems like a great choice.
You're a Minnesota native, right? Outside of the academic thing, have you thought about what the climate at Tulane might be like for you?
Does getting far enough away from the family to really feel like you're on your own play into it?
I have a personal bias against big state schools (I went to Macalester College in the Twin Cities for my undergrad), and I also think that there is some very real worth in investing in an education at an institution with rigorous standards and a peer cohort that you'll be challenged by. (As a comparison, I'm in the MBA program at the University of St. Thomas, another TC private school, and my classes are bordering on ludicrously easy--grad school has been something of a disappointment). You will likely be able to find academic rigor and challenging peers at big state schools, but you'll have to actively work to find them.
Oh, and I'll note that I graduated with an English/Creative Writing BA. 10 years later, I find myself wishing I'd studied Economics and Public Policy.
No appreciable difference between Tulane and Iowa? Really?
To my mind, yes. Really, outside the top five or six schools, the importance of being able to put this or that school on your resume is way overestimated (especially in a case like yours where none of the schools is a true no-name).
Ah. I'd assumed you'd gotten some sort of instate tuition-reduction on top of your fancy-pants National Merit Scholarness to bring you down to zero.
The Twin Cities are a great town to be a college student in. On top of all of the opportunities the U of M offers, there's a vibrant music scene (punk/alternative/ underground hip hop), multiple cool neighborhoods not far from campus, two downtowns a short bus ride away, a good running/biking trail system...and the Mississippi River runs right through the middle of campus. I don't think Iowa can offer all of that.
Oh, and one last thing: don't feel guilty about being proud of your ACT score. In Minnesota it gets much, much colder that you might think (KC gets nowhere close). When you're living off campus in an underinsulated/drafty apartment with 4 other students, sometimes memories of standardized test scores are the only thing you have to keep yourself warm.
On going to big big state schools: Along with the good advice Wolfson gave above, I'd recommend being very discriminating in your course selection. Every semester I'd go to a bunch of classes during the first few weeks, maybe even enroll in more classes than I could take, and then drop the ones that seemed less worthwhile. At state schools there can be a huge range between the best and worst courses/teachers so you have to seek out the best ones. At the upper end, though, you can get the kind of education that "prestige" schools offer/advertise.
For example, I had a hell of a time getting decent courses to fill my composition requirement: I ended up dropping four English courses along the way. So a two semester requirement took four semesters to fill (because, after taking the first half in my first semester it took me until the end of sophomore year to find a good second class).
Most of this won't matter if you don't go to a state school, but I'd take a look at the catalogs for your choices to make sure they offer the kinds of classes you'd be interested in both within and outside of your potential major(s).
Really, outside the top five or six schools, the importance of being able to put this or that school on your resume is way overestimated (especially in a case like yours where none of the schools is a true no-name).
This is pretty much the case -- once you're out of the Ivies, Stanford, etc., all reasonably good schools, which all of your options are, are equivalently statusy. The only thing I'd say is that if you're the kind of person who will slack off if allowed, or who will lose yourself in the crowd, Tulane may be a better bet -- big state schools can be easy to get through without learning much. If you're more self-directed, though, you should get just as much out of Minnesota as Tulane.
In my experience, especially if you're not sure what you want to study in undergrad, the overall experience you're looking for is far more important than the reputation of any given faculty member.
I spent a lot of money to go to Northwestern for my first year because it had a great reputation, but it was so very far from the college experience I was seeking, and I was unspeakably miserable. When I transferred to Texas I was in a generic state school with 50,000 others, deliriously happy, and now three years out, doing fine in career and ongoing studies. But I certainly knew people at Texas who weren't temperamentally suited for the huge school. Where I saw boundless opportunity, others saw suffocating anonymity.
Nothing beats visiting the campuses and getting a sense for what life there is really like. And definitely: do not go into debt for undergrad. You can always distinguish yourself and hit up an extravagant grad school should you desire. I vote Minne eapolis. The twin cities are surprisingly hip.
Interesting question. I think huge debt is soul-crushing. I also think that UM (or Iowa, really) will offer you plenty of opportunity to excel; it will also offer you many chances to be a doofus. If you know what you're about, you can do some great things at Big State. But, as many people here have pointed out, you'll need to be more self-motivating, etc.
No, it was a concise summary. Well, *I* liked it anyway. I surely didn't understand, and would have loved to have it drilled into my head, that huge debt is soul-crushing.
And don't forget that one can often transfer from school A to school B, should the A experience not be satisfactory. Sometimes it's worth it to go to a less-expensive school for a year or two, knock out the gen-ed requirements, then transfer.
There is also an amazing amount of money out there in esoteric scholarships. Look into them. I had one in law school that was specifically for a single working parent who attended law school at night. A friend of mine had one for the third daughter of a Methodist minister. Odd, but good for one's budget.
I can't be the only person who's really interested in why L chose this site to ask that question. Not that I don't think the advice people gave is good, it was. But if I was asking advice for college from a blog, I'd be sorely tempted to ask Leiter, and probably a couple of others.
Unless L is a lurker here and has developed a good level of trust in the opinions of the commenters. In which case, L, I question your judgment.
Washerdreyer has a point. Why trust this site? Not that they haven't been giving you good advice, but is it the right advice for you? Talk to some people doing things that look interesting to you, and figure out how they got there. In some fields, the contacts you make at school matter -- so it might help to go to school near where you want to live. Susan's advice to save up for a big name grad school makes sense -- if you might go to grad school. If you are going to major in a small field (physics, sanskrit) you can get personal attention anywhere. If you are going to major in a big field (econ, english) you'll have to fight awfully hard to be noticed on a big campus.
I've done it all: student at a small Minnesota college, postdoc at a high powered tech "institute," faculty member at an Ivy, administrator at an R1 public. They've all been great places. Everywhere on your list is a great place, and worth the cost to the right student. I wouldn't be as fast as others here to rule out CM or Tulane. But it isn't easy doing double-blind advising.
some pretty fucking awesome partying goes down at Tulane. and the food is amazing. but don't take my advice since I'm a trust fund baby. you should probably follow teh free.
And another vote confirming that debt sucks. I got a free ride through college -- my folks just paid -- but covered my own law school. Even coming straight out of law school into a job making a shitload of money, it is taking me forever, and a painful forever, to pay my debt off.
(I'm assuming that L. has more sense than to take the advice of a bunch of random lunatics on the internet without buckets and buckets of salt. In case I'm mistaken about this: L -- the most reliance you should place on any of this is to use it as a base for your own thinking, or to take concerns to a real-life person whose opinion you trust.)
L, if you do choose to go to a state school, I have to also and emphatically recommend that you seek out professors. At the University of Texas (hook 'em), I asked anyone I could (school officials, older students) about the better professors in different fields, and by following them I think I got more out of certain classes and requirements than I might have otherwise. I was an English and art history student but have a passion for physics because I took the right classes. It's important to recognize, though, that the popular professors aren't always the greatest, but you'll figure that out.
Second point about the big school, perhaps most important—go to every football game.
L, Carnegie Mellon often will match aid if you have a competing offer. When I was accepted there back in the day, they were usually very conservative on their initial aid offer, but were willing to bargain if the student was being courted with more money from somewhere else.
If you really want to go to CMU, that might be one thing to look into. Otherwise, don't worry about the name so much and what everyone else said about debt. Find the school that fits and have fun.
You, know, I've heard that that's true of lots of places, and it would never have occurred to me when I was in high school. Wherever you decide you really want to go, you should absolutely call the financial aid office, tell them about the Minn. free ride, and tell them that you want desperately to go to their school, but you don't know how you can justify the decision financially. Obviously, no guarantees that it will work, but my impresion is that it works more places than you'd think.
(Is L. even still reading this? Next week: Ogged gives advice to the lovelorn.)
Thanks everyone. L. has heard lots of conflicting advice so she's looking for the wisdom of the crowd. Ogged (and others) made the same points I did, thus increasing my credibility. Maybe.
I think "Jesus" means "Pretending to hit on high-school seniors is a way of joking about one's desperation that is more sad than funny." Amazing how you can pack so much into one word.
People, people, I was just trying to ease the transition for L and Mom from the innocent world of high school to the shark tank that is Big U. I was kidding, but her English prof won't be.
You know, it honestly never occurred to me that a high schooler and his/her parent would both be readers of the blog. Puts a smile on my face. Thanks, L's Mom.
This is going to go in the humorless column, but, for what it's worth (and L. or L.'s Mom -- to the extent you're reading, I'm making general points here, not about you in any specific sense, I'm sure you weren't particularly bothered.) I'll explain.
The point of the joke you made (mild, you backed off from it with the 'just kidding', I am in no way thinking that you were remotely serious) was -- "Hey, underage girl on the internet -- let's sexually harass her!" Now -- obviously you're not like that for real, no one who comments here a lot is, it was just a joke. But, you know, a it's joke that reminds her that while this may be a nice place, in general she can assume that even when she's trying to communicate about a neutral issue, she's going to be treated as sexual prey by virtue of her age and gender. God forbid she should get a chance to be present in a public space without being reminded of that at every opportunity.
And I should have remembered Wellesley too -- I always get it mixed up with Wesleyan.
I would have guessed that L is 18, because to me, that's the stereotypical HS senior age. Suppose that Tim knew that LB's daughter was 5; at a difference of 13 years, that would make ogged 31. However, would a 31-year-old man refer to himself as being "in his thirties"? I doubt it--it probably rankles too much, and he probably thinks to himself, "hey, I'm only 31. That's not really 'in my thirties'. 35 is 'in my thirties'. I'm still pretty young!". He's got to be older than that, but how much? Well, he's still paying off debt. Do we know how much he makes? He seems to have lots of neato gadgets. We can probably establish an upper bound of, say, 37. I say, ogged is between 32 and 36.
Sally is as close to L's age as Ogged is to LB's age. LB is older than Ogged.
If Sally is 5 and L is 17, Ogged is 29.
How old is LB?
Solution: Let x = LB's age. x - Ogged's age = L's age - Sally's age. Substituting the given values, x -29 = 17 - 5. Adding 29 to both sides, x = 29 + 17 -5 = 41.
But I may have misread some of the hints somewhere. (OK, I see that I had some reason to think ac is my age, and if you went to high school together you can't be much more than 4 years older than her unless you got left back. Thought I thought you were younger'n that.)
Ah, I see. Then I would have been following your exploits with close attention, while you didn't know me. I meant to say earlier - I remember your (older) sister very well, and always thought she was very cool.
And LB graduated from law school in '99 and was living in Samoa for IIRC two years (presumably post-undergrad). This makes me tempted to say she graduated college in '94.
If we really wanted to, we could probably sort everyone's age pretty well. But the process would inevitably lead to Wolfson Indiscretion Errors, which could be bad or creepy.
I think they're talking about the comment thread where my cover got blown -- you're getting the credit for that. FTR, now that I've cleaned up the relevant security hole, I'm not particularly concerned -- my only reason for anonymity is to be inconspicuous to people I might know professionally, and, for the same reason, to Google.
The weird thing is that while I generally think women are the sexier gender—well, in most given situations, but specific to Olympic sports—the women don't hold a candle to male swimmers. I think Unfogged has already hosted this conversation once, but Michael Phelps looks like a god (a goofy one, albeit) whereas his female counterparts just look like swimmers.
The exaggeratedly broad shoulders and wide lats you get from swimming do look better on men than on women -- the men look more masculine, and the women get androgynous.
Something strikes me as off with your use of the appositive there, b-wo, but I'm having trouble articulating it. Possibly that it's not clear to whom "being taken" refers, but I don't think that's it.
Good lord, you mean not only is PG stringing me along while she arranges to have sex with god knows whom, but her stringing me along is scaring off other lovely ladies? Hey, thanks PG, owe ya one.
Leave it to LB to twist the knife. I was actually thinking of you when I didn't just say "loyal:" I probably would have to turn in even a good friend who was contemplating, say, a murder. That's the kind of disloyalty I had in mind (though if the potential victim deserved it, who knows....)
You know, LB, you've spent a fair bit of time here, but I can't recall you ever offering to set up the very tall Labs with your very tall sister. And since you were considering setting her up with KC Johnson, we know it's can't possibly be a matter of high standards, so what gives?
You know, it's a shame you aren't in the NY area -- you'd like my sister, and she's single. (I can't remember offhand how she feels about Jeff Goldblum lookalikes).
Kriston, I'm a bit older than that, but I really admire your commitment to truth and fairness, putting your lady back in play like that. We should duel, sir.
Hey, according to ogged, people move every few years these days anyway. Maybe one or both of {ogged, LB's sister} wants to change locales (and I'm not talkin' 'bout LC_ALL).
L&O? I'm terrible with actor names -- I associated Chris Noth with Sex and the City, which I've never seen. I should know what he looks like from L&O.
(quick visit to IMDB)
Oh, that guy.
It's alright, LB - I have barely concealed hostility towards Ogged, too.
I was thinking I was more in the open ambivalence rather than the barely concealed hostility category. I mean, I am entertaining the thought of fixing him up with the esteemed Dr. Oops, would I do that if I were concealing hostility? (No one who knows her answer that, please.)
If we're trying to work out what you look like by identifying common features of the two, I think all that we can know for certain is that your brow is furrowed.
107, 109: It's a participle (appositives are noun phrases), and not dangling--'being taken' applies to 'women', also the antecedent of 'whom'. I vaguely feel as though the problem is that you can't put a participle between 'around whom' and 'he can relax', but I'm not sure. Have to call in a professional.
Hmm... seems like that clause would be obtained from 'Ogged can relax around them', and you can't say 'Ogged can relax around them, being taken'. Can those participles only modify to the subject of the sentence?
I'd say that this illustrates Thurber's dictum, "Not even Henry James could escape intact from a sentence containing a 'which', a 'whom', and a 'being'," but I'd hate to call any of the taken ladies witches.
(Given that she'd kick my ass if she knew I were shopping her around the Internet, just as well. Sadly, I may not be able to avoid the Johnson fixup -- I really like the mutual friends, and they think it's the greatest idea ever. I will simply have to rely on her innate good taste.)
Hmm... seems like that clause would be obtained from 'Ogged can relax around them', and you can't say 'Ogged can relax around them, being taken'. Can those participles only modify to the subject of the sentence?
You see—this is why we need cases. You can do that in latin, no problem. Except there's no present passive participle (I wonder how you get around that? I probably used to know).
You know, at least you're hostile to me; you haven't even acknowledged the Labs possibility. He doesn't really have undergraduates blowing him, you know.
I have to ask: given that FL hates basketball despite the fact that he's ginormous and gym-fit, can one in good conscience set him up with a tall Dem? Isn't that sort of a waste of height potential on a child who is less likely to appropriately use it?
Old(e) English - back when it was pretty close to old German, Dutch, Icelandic, etc. - had cases, right? Maybe we should just look them up and bring them back.
Has anyone else ever brought up cases in conversation with others about languages only to have someone think you were talking about things like capital letters?
You know, at least you're hostile to me; you haven't even acknowledged the Labs possibility.
Mostly because he just doesn't give off the same air of desperately needing a date that you do.
Is Johnson really such an odious fellow?
His blogging makes him sound like a bit of a twerp. On the other hand, I like the mutual friends a lot, and they think he's great, so he may not be that bad.
Isn't that sort of a waste of height potential on a child who is less likely to appropriately use it?
Dr. Oops can safely be relied on to cover the transmission of general jock-type-skills. Medicine wasn't the alternative to a professional ball career, but she's pretty good.
What's your e-mail, Ogged? I want your opinion on something.
Posted by L | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 6:28 PM
ogged at unfogged dot com
But there are plenty of my opinions all over this site y'know.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 6:30 PM
Well, in that case I won't deny the denizens of Unfogged the chance to opine. I'm a senior in high school and I have to decide where to get my undergraduate degree within the week. Is prestige worth the debt?
Posted by L | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 6:40 PM
What are your options?
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 6:42 PM
L, we'll need more information, like LB says. What are the schools, and what are the competing aid packages? You're anonymous, so don't be shy.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 6:44 PM
In descending order of cost: Carnegie Mellon, Wellesley, Tulane, Iowa, or Minnesota.
I have no idea what I'd like to study or what I'd like to do when I'd graduate.
Posted by L | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 6:44 PM
It is also probably important to note that I could go to Minnesota debt-free. I'm a National Merit Scholar and have a perfect ACT, which is probably not so important but makes me feel special.
Posted by L | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 6:46 PM
Are you looking at a Liberal Arts program?
Posted by Chopper | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 6:46 PM
How much debt are we talking about at the other schools, and you must have some idea what you'll study.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 6:47 PM
Debt principal over four years is about $94000 at Carnegie Mellon, $74000 at Wellesley, $26000 at Tulane, $12000 at Iowa, and $0 at Minnesota.
I've been admitted to liberal arts programs at all of the above-named institutions, plus the College of Science at CMU and the Institute of Technology at Minnesota.
I've been sort of leaning toward economics/finance/pure math. Ish. And I assume I'll change my mind at some point.
Posted by L | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 6:51 PM
On the phone, at the moment, but...forget mellon and wellesley...
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 6:57 PM
CMU's got a kick-ass compsci program.
The NYT had an article about life at big big big state schools, though the worries brought up can almost certainly be circumvented if you're disciplined, go to office hours, make an effort to do work, etc.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 6:58 PM
Ok, this is one guy's opinion, obviously, and other people will weigh in, but debt of the kind involved at Mellon and Wellesley is never worthwhile. It seems abstract when you're starting school, but take it from a guy in his thirties who is still paying it off: it affects your life for years and years, and seriously narrows the range of things you can do. Not worth it.
Of the remaining three, to my mind, there isn't an appreciable difference in prestige between them, so I don't see, absent new information, why you'd choose Tulane, because $26,000 is still pretty steep.
That leaves Iowa and Minnesota, which are both big state schools, and both quite good. If I were making the decision, it would be about whether putting up with Minnesota's weather is worth $12,000 (not that Iowa is Miami). But there must be other considerations for you. Do you know anyone at either school? Do you know, even by reputation, any professors there? Etc.
The short answer though, is this: getting out of school debt-free is a wonderful and enviable position to be in, and you've done good by earning the chance. Minnesota is a good school, and the Twin Cities are actually quite nice. Unless the thought of Minnesota's winters is unbearable to you, it seems like a great choice.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 7:12 PM
You're a Minnesota native, right? Outside of the academic thing, have you thought about what the climate at Tulane might be like for you?
Does getting far enough away from the family to really feel like you're on your own play into it?
I have a personal bias against big state schools (I went to Macalester College in the Twin Cities for my undergrad), and I also think that there is some very real worth in investing in an education at an institution with rigorous standards and a peer cohort that you'll be challenged by. (As a comparison, I'm in the MBA program at the University of St. Thomas, another TC private school, and my classes are bordering on ludicrously easy--grad school has been something of a disappointment). You will likely be able to find academic rigor and challenging peers at big state schools, but you'll have to actively work to find them.
Oh, and I'll note that I graduated with an English/Creative Writing BA. 10 years later, I find myself wishing I'd studied Economics and Public Policy.
Posted by Chopper | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 7:13 PM
Actually, I'm a Kansas City native, so I'm pretty confident in my ability to endure crappy weather at both ends of the spectrum.
I think at least one person from my high school is going to Minnesota and Iowa. I don't know any professors, by reputation or otherwise.
No appreciable difference between Tulane and Iowa? Really?
Posted by L | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 7:19 PM
No appreciable difference between Tulane and Iowa? Really?
To my mind, yes. Really, outside the top five or six schools, the importance of being able to put this or that school on your resume is way overestimated (especially in a case like yours where none of the schools is a true no-name).
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 7:27 PM
Ah. I'd assumed you'd gotten some sort of instate tuition-reduction on top of your fancy-pants National Merit Scholarness to bring you down to zero.
The Twin Cities are a great town to be a college student in. On top of all of the opportunities the U of M offers, there's a vibrant music scene (punk/alternative/ underground hip hop), multiple cool neighborhoods not far from campus, two downtowns a short bus ride away, a good running/biking trail system...and the Mississippi River runs right through the middle of campus. I don't think Iowa can offer all of that.
Oh, and one last thing: don't feel guilty about being proud of your ACT score. In Minnesota it gets much, much colder that you might think (KC gets nowhere close). When you're living off campus in an underinsulated/drafty apartment with 4 other students, sometimes memories of standardized test scores are the only thing you have to keep yourself warm.
Posted by Chopper | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 7:34 PM
Look at me! I killed two threads at once!
Posted by Chopper | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 7:59 PM
On going to big big state schools: Along with the good advice Wolfson gave above, I'd recommend being very discriminating in your course selection. Every semester I'd go to a bunch of classes during the first few weeks, maybe even enroll in more classes than I could take, and then drop the ones that seemed less worthwhile. At state schools there can be a huge range between the best and worst courses/teachers so you have to seek out the best ones. At the upper end, though, you can get the kind of education that "prestige" schools offer/advertise.
For example, I had a hell of a time getting decent courses to fill my composition requirement: I ended up dropping four English courses along the way. So a two semester requirement took four semesters to fill (because, after taking the first half in my first semester it took me until the end of sophomore year to find a good second class).
Most of this won't matter if you don't go to a state school, but I'd take a look at the catalogs for your choices to make sure they offer the kinds of classes you'd be interested in both within and outside of your potential major(s).
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 8:23 PM
Really, outside the top five or six schools, the importance of being able to put this or that school on your resume is way overestimated (especially in a case like yours where none of the schools is a true no-name).
This is pretty much the case -- once you're out of the Ivies, Stanford, etc., all reasonably good schools, which all of your options are, are equivalently statusy. The only thing I'd say is that if you're the kind of person who will slack off if allowed, or who will lose yourself in the crowd, Tulane may be a better bet -- big state schools can be easy to get through without learning much. If you're more self-directed, though, you should get just as much out of Minnesota as Tulane.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 8:43 PM
In my experience, especially if you're not sure what you want to study in undergrad, the overall experience you're looking for is far more important than the reputation of any given faculty member.
I spent a lot of money to go to Northwestern for my first year because it had a great reputation, but it was so very far from the college experience I was seeking, and I was unspeakably miserable. When I transferred to Texas I was in a generic state school with 50,000 others, deliriously happy, and now three years out, doing fine in career and ongoing studies. But I certainly knew people at Texas who weren't temperamentally suited for the huge school. Where I saw boundless opportunity, others saw suffocating anonymity.
Nothing beats visiting the campuses and getting a sense for what life there is really like. And definitely: do not go into debt for undergrad. You can always distinguish yourself and hit up an extravagant grad school should you desire. I vote Minne eapolis. The twin cities are surprisingly hip.
Posted by susan | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 8:46 PM
"...big state schools can be easy to get through without learning much.
Gotta second this. Nobody's going to hold your hand at the big schools. This suited me fine, but it's not for everyone.
Posted by susan | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 8:49 PM
Interesting question. I think huge debt is soul-crushing. I also think that UM (or Iowa, really) will offer you plenty of opportunity to excel; it will also offer you many chances to be a doofus. If you know what you're about, you can do some great things at Big State. But, as many people here have pointed out, you'll need to be more self-motivating, etc.
Posted by FL | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 9:00 PM
[redacted]
Posted by [redacted] | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 9:07 PM
No, it was a concise summary. Well, *I* liked it anyway. I surely didn't understand, and would have loved to have it drilled into my head, that huge debt is soul-crushing.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 9:09 PM
Plus, it helps to hear it from many people, and despite it being a cosmic joke, you are, in fact, a professor.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 9:10 PM
And don't forget that one can often transfer from school A to school B, should the A experience not be satisfactory. Sometimes it's worth it to go to a less-expensive school for a year or two, knock out the gen-ed requirements, then transfer.
There is also an amazing amount of money out there in esoteric scholarships. Look into them. I had one in law school that was specifically for a single working parent who attended law school at night. A friend of mine had one for the third daughter of a Methodist minister. Odd, but good for one's budget.
Posted by DominEditrix | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 9:42 PM
I can't be the only person who's really interested in why L chose this site to ask that question. Not that I don't think the advice people gave is good, it was. But if I was asking advice for college from a blog, I'd be sorely tempted to ask Leiter, and probably a couple of others.
Unless L is a lurker here and has developed a good level of trust in the opinions of the commenters. In which case, L, I question your judgment.
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 9:48 PM
Washerdreyer has a point. Why trust this site? Not that they haven't been giving you good advice, but is it the right advice for you? Talk to some people doing things that look interesting to you, and figure out how they got there. In some fields, the contacts you make at school matter -- so it might help to go to school near where you want to live. Susan's advice to save up for a big name grad school makes sense -- if you might go to grad school. If you are going to major in a small field (physics, sanskrit) you can get personal attention anywhere. If you are going to major in a big field (econ, english) you'll have to fight awfully hard to be noticed on a big campus.
I've done it all: student at a small Minnesota college, postdoc at a high powered tech "institute," faculty member at an Ivy, administrator at an R1 public. They've all been great places. Everywhere on your list is a great place, and worth the cost to the right student. I wouldn't be as fast as others here to rule out CM or Tulane. But it isn't easy doing double-blind advising.
Posted by anon | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 10:41 PM
Tongue firmly in cheek for second graf of 28.
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 04-26-05 10:59 PM
some pretty fucking awesome partying goes down at Tulane. and the food is amazing. but don't take my advice since I'm a trust fund baby. you should probably follow teh free.
Posted by alameida | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 3:32 AM
And another vote confirming that debt sucks. I got a free ride through college -- my folks just paid -- but covered my own law school. Even coming straight out of law school into a job making a shitload of money, it is taking me forever, and a painful forever, to pay my debt off.
(I'm assuming that L. has more sense than to take the advice of a bunch of random lunatics on the internet without buckets and buckets of salt. In case I'm mistaken about this: L -- the most reliance you should place on any of this is to use it as a base for your own thinking, or to take concerns to a real-life person whose opinion you trust.)
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 5:11 AM
L, if you do choose to go to a state school, I have to also and emphatically recommend that you seek out professors. At the University of Texas (hook 'em), I asked anyone I could (school officials, older students) about the better professors in different fields, and by following them I think I got more out of certain classes and requirements than I might have otherwise. I was an English and art history student but have a passion for physics because I took the right classes. It's important to recognize, though, that the popular professors aren't always the greatest, but you'll figure that out.
Second point about the big school, perhaps most important—go to every football game.
Posted by Kriston | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 5:27 AM
Second point about the big school, perhaps most important—go to every football game.
Unless you go to Minnesota, in which case you'll have to figure out how to root for a Golden Gopher and maintain some shred of self respect.
(Please overlook that at Texas I cheered for a glorified cow for three years and counting...)
Posted by susan | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 6:16 AM
L, Carnegie Mellon often will match aid if you have a competing offer. When I was accepted there back in the day, they were usually very conservative on their initial aid offer, but were willing to bargain if the student was being courted with more money from somewhere else.
If you really want to go to CMU, that might be one thing to look into. Otherwise, don't worry about the name so much and what everyone else said about debt. Find the school that fits and have fun.
Posted by Cala | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 7:05 AM
You, know, I've heard that that's true of lots of places, and it would never have occurred to me when I was in high school. Wherever you decide you really want to go, you should absolutely call the financial aid office, tell them about the Minn. free ride, and tell them that you want desperately to go to their school, but you don't know how you can justify the decision financially. Obviously, no guarantees that it will work, but my impresion is that it works more places than you'd think.
(Is L. even still reading this? Next week: Ogged gives advice to the lovelorn.)
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 7:12 AM
Thanks everyone. L. has heard lots of conflicting advice so she's looking for the wisdom of the crowd. Ogged (and others) made the same points I did, thus increasing my credibility. Maybe.
(L. - I'm proud of you...but make up your mind!)
Posted by L.'s Mom | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 7:40 AM
L is a girl?
Is she cute?
Kidding, L's mom, kidding.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:00 AM
Jesus, Ogged.
And another point for the 'most people perceive non-gendered pseuds as male' theory.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:04 AM
For the record, I perceived L as a girl. Not quite sure why. Subtle pick-up on writing style (as compared with my own stereotypes)?
Posted by Michael | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:07 AM
Why am I getting a Jesus?
'most people perceive non-gendered pseuds as male'
This is indubitably true, no?
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:09 AM
I perceived L as a girl because she listed Wellesley as one of her options. Wellesley's still all-women.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:09 AM
L is a girly letter
Posted by text | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:09 AM
No, I think it's fair for LB to give you a "Jesus". She's got kids who are probably closer to L's age than you are to L's age, so ya know....
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:11 AM
I think "Jesus" means "Pretending to hit on high-school seniors is a way of joking about one's desperation that is more sad than funny." Amazing how you can pack so much into one word.
Posted by Matt "p, k" Weiner | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:11 AM
I perceived L as not quite a girl, but not yet a woman.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:12 AM
I also picked up 'girl.'
Posted by Chopper | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:13 AM
Wow. Maybe Wolfson does have a sense of humor.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:14 AM
As it were.
Posted by Chopper | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:14 AM
People, people, I was just trying to ease the transition for L and Mom from the innocent world of high school to the shark tank that is Big U. I was kidding, but her English prof won't be.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:14 AM
or philo prof. Labs doesn't work at any of those institutions, does he?
Posted by Michael | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:15 AM
Re 47: Congratulations!
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:16 AM
Given that she's a regular reader of your blog, I'd say she's not totally naive. Good thing L's Dad doesn't read your blog, though.
(She runs more to beautiful than cute, but I might be biased).
Posted by L's Mom | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:19 AM
Oh, we can't have beautiful.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:20 AM
I wonder if we can connect ogged's emphasis on cuteness to a tendency towards infantilization.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:22 AM
You know, it honestly never occurred to me that a high schooler and his/her parent would both be readers of the blog. Puts a smile on my face. Thanks, L's Mom.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:22 AM
Why am I getting a Jesus?
This is going to go in the humorless column, but, for what it's worth (and L. or L.'s Mom -- to the extent you're reading, I'm making general points here, not about you in any specific sense, I'm sure you weren't particularly bothered.) I'll explain.
The point of the joke you made (mild, you backed off from it with the 'just kidding', I am in no way thinking that you were remotely serious) was -- "Hey, underage girl on the internet -- let's sexually harass her!" Now -- obviously you're not like that for real, no one who comments here a lot is, it was just a joke. But, you know, a it's joke that reminds her that while this may be a nice place, in general she can assume that even when she's trying to communicate about a neutral issue, she's going to be treated as sexual prey by virtue of her age and gender. God forbid she should get a chance to be present in a public space without being reminded of that at every opportunity.
And I should have remembered Wellesley too -- I always get it mixed up with Wesleyan.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:23 AM
That's a fair point, LB, generally speaking, and I wouldn't even have made the joke if I couldn't have addressed it to L's mom.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:26 AM
Which does provide some cover here. L's Mom isn't annoyed so no big deal.
She's got kids who are probably closer to L's age than you are to L's age, so ya know....
I don't know how old ogged is, but my daughter's five. So, pretty close.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:29 AM
If I read my ap-ogged-rapha correctly, that's right of the line of making my claim [Top Secret].
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:32 AM
So if L.'s 17, ogged is 29? Suddenly, Unfogged becomes the logic section of the LSATs.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:38 AM
You know, I've dropped the biggest clue to my age in this very thread.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:39 AM
Making LB 41?
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:40 AM
It seems abstract when you're starting school, but take it from a guy in his thirties who is still paying it off:
That's not really oblique enough to be a clue.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:41 AM
How do you get from "Has a five year old daughter" to 41? I missed the other data point.
And I also missed the 'guy in his thirties' upthread. So Sally (short for 'Salamander') is closer to L's age than ogged is.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:43 AM
I would have guessed that L is 18, because to me, that's the stereotypical HS senior age. Suppose that Tim knew that LB's daughter was 5; at a difference of 13 years, that would make ogged 31. However, would a 31-year-old man refer to himself as being "in his thirties"? I doubt it--it probably rankles too much, and he probably thinks to himself, "hey, I'm only 31. That's not really 'in my thirties'. 35 is 'in my thirties'. I'm still pretty young!". He's got to be older than that, but how much? Well, he's still paying off debt. Do we know how much he makes? He seems to have lots of neato gadgets. We can probably establish an upper bound of, say, 37. I say, ogged is between 32 and 36.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:45 AM
Didn't Ogged once mention that he'd been out of his master's program for 10 years? Wouldn't that put him (ballpark) around 34?
Posted by Chopper | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:48 AM
Sure, none of us like him, but the man's a genius.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:48 AM
if Ogged is claiming to be "in his thirties", he's obviously 42.
Posted by mike d | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:48 AM
He seems to have lots of neato gadgets.
On the other hand, he's been driven to making his own floor lamps.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:48 AM
he's been driven to making his own floor lamps
That was an aesthetic choice, LB.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:49 AM
On the other hand, he's been driven to making his own floor lamps.
He wanted to get back in touch with the everyday work-world. Craftsmanship, baby!
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:50 AM
Word problem:
Sally is as close to L's age as Ogged is to LB's age. LB is older than Ogged.
If Sally is 5 and L is 17, Ogged is 29.
How old is LB?
Solution: Let x = LB's age. x - Ogged's age = L's age - Sally's age. Substituting the given values, x -29 = 17 - 5. Adding 29 to both sides, x = 29 + 17 -5 = 41.
But I may have misread some of the hints somewhere. (OK, I see that I had some reason to think ac is my age, and if you went to high school together you can't be much more than 4 years older than her unless you got left back. Thought I thought you were younger'n that.)
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:50 AM
Wait a second, I just can't read. Problem solved!
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:52 AM
you can't be much more than 4 years older than her unless you got left back.
My secret shame -- revealed!
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 8:58 AM
I have named my age, Matt. It's true that LB could have been in ninth grade when I was senior. But then I'm sure I'd have no idea who she was.
Posted by ac | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 10:05 AM
And I guess I know how old Ogged is.
Posted by ac | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 10:06 AM
It's true that LB could have been in ninth grade when I was senior.
Vice versa was what Weiner was thinking -- he knows you're his age, and thought I was older.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 10:34 AM
Ah, I see. Then I would have been following your exploits with close attention, while you didn't know me. I meant to say earlier - I remember your (older) sister very well, and always thought she was very cool.
Posted by ac | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 11:22 AM
There's pretty conclusive evidence that ac is either 34 or 35. I don't know if this changes anyone's estimates.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 11:27 AM
She is pretty cool, isn't she. You know she transplants livers now?
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 11:33 AM
Yeah, if you guys were trying to guess ages, was everyone looking at this thread? Because there are plenty of good clues there.
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 11:34 AM
And LB graduated from law school in '99 and was living in Samoa for IIRC two years (presumably post-undergrad). This makes me tempted to say she graduated college in '94.
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 11:38 AM
No, I did not know that, LB. It's odd, though, I have the feeling that I knew your sister better than I knew you. But I don't know why that would be.
Posted by ac | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 11:40 AM
If we really wanted to, we could probably sort everyone's age pretty well. But the process would inevitably lead to Wolfson Indiscretion Errors, which could be bad or creepy.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 11:42 AM
'92 -- there were 18 months of various jobs between Samoa and law school.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 11:44 AM
And everyone knew her better than they knew me -- she's always been wildly impressive, while I am, in contrast, distinctly unobtrusive.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 11:46 AM
re: 85 - I seem to remember that line having been crossed in a thread a while back.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 11:48 AM
Don't short yourself, LB. I think a lot of us would say your not just obtrusive, but very obtrusive.
(Frist?)
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 11:49 AM
Re: 88; I just thought perhaps forewarned/forarmed as regards repeating the same mistake twice.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 11:50 AM
Yep '92.
Posted by ac | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 11:50 AM
distinctly unobtrusive.
Is it possible to be so extremely unobtrusive that you are not even distinctly so?
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 11:51 AM
Text-based, sure. In person, I am frequently upstaged by wallpaper.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 11:51 AM
85, 88, what are you talking about?
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 11:54 AM
Is 94 one of those "jokes" that usually lead to someone typing "a mind so fine"?
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 11:57 AM
I think they're talking about the comment thread where my cover got blown -- you're getting the credit for that. FTR, now that I've cleaned up the relevant security hole, I'm not particularly concerned -- my only reason for anonymity is to be inconspicuous to people I might know professionally, and, for the same reason, to Google.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 11:59 AM
That's exactly what I was referring to.
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 12:01 PM
Your cover was blowing itself, man.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 12:03 PM
Yeah, that wasn't so much 'cover' as 'total absence of cover'. Just hadn't thought anyone would bother to look.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 12:07 PM
100!
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 12:08 PM
Apostropher hasn't taken my bait.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 12:12 PM
Swimmers are sexy.
Posted by susan | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 12:15 PM
paging ogged....
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 12:23 PM
No paging Ogged, she's taken. Maybe not for long if I don't do some laps.
Posted by Kriston | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 12:49 PM
Just thought I'd go wild and say something relevant to the original post.
Posted by susan | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 12:51 PM
The weird thing is that while I generally think women are the sexier gender—well, in most given situations, but specific to Olympic sports—the women don't hold a candle to male swimmers. I think Unfogged has already hosted this conversation once, but Michael Phelps looks like a god (a goofy one, albeit) whereas his female counterparts just look like swimmers.
Posted by Kriston | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 12:58 PM
Ogged needs to practice flirting with women around whom, being taken, he can relax.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 1:12 PM
The exaggeratedly broad shoulders and wide lats you get from swimming do look better on men than on women -- the men look more masculine, and the women get androgynous.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 1:16 PM
Something strikes me as off with your use of the appositive there, b-wo, but I'm having trouble articulating it. Possibly that it's not clear to whom "being taken" refers, but I don't think that's it.
Posted by washerdreyer | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 1:17 PM
Ogged here! Damn, I was off swimming, does that make it better?
It's ok Kriston, I'm a reasonably loyal guy, and anyway, if I try to make a move on Susan, LB will smack me down for cradle robbing.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 1:21 PM
I had a similar concern, w/d. Too bad we can't rely on cases to disambiguate.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 1:22 PM
I think it's the ambiguity of what is meant by "being taken." Though, if ogged can't relax after that second sense, there's no hope for him at all.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 1:22 PM
I like the laxity of "reasonably loyal" guy, ogged.
Posted by ac | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 1:28 PM
I wouldn't presume to intrude on PG's turf anyway.
Posted by susan | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 1:29 PM
Good lord, you mean not only is PG stringing me along while she arranges to have sex with god knows whom, but her stringing me along is scaring off other lovely ladies? Hey, thanks PG, owe ya one.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 1:32 PM
You know, loyal except where there's a good reason not to be. Like, say, a particularly enticing cradle.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 1:36 PM
Nice! A truly ethereal cock block, executed entirely by women and entirely in the abstract.
Posted by Chopper | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 1:37 PM
Leave it to LB to twist the knife. I was actually thinking of you when I didn't just say "loyal:" I probably would have to turn in even a good friend who was contemplating, say, a murder. That's the kind of disloyalty I had in mind (though if the potential victim deserved it, who knows....)
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 1:38 PM
You know, LB, you've spent a fair bit of time here, but I can't recall you ever offering to set up the very tall Labs with your very tall sister. And since you were considering setting her up with KC Johnson, we know it's can't possibly be a matter of high standards, so what gives?
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 1:41 PM
What were we saying, Ogged's 29? Somewhere therein? L's too young, but Susan's in your price range.
Posted by Kriston | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 1:42 PM
You know, it's a shame you aren't in the NY area -- you'd like my sister, and she's single. (I can't remember offhand how she feels about Jeff Goldblum lookalikes).
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 1:42 PM
Cross-post. I thought Labs was dating someone.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 1:43 PM
No no, Labs is desperately lonely.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 1:44 PM
Does he need a new liver? I understand she gets a discount.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 1:45 PM
Kriston, I'm a bit older than that, but I really admire your commitment to truth and fairness, putting your lady back in play like that. We should duel, sir.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 1:45 PM
Hey, according to ogged, people move every few years these days anyway. Maybe one or both of {ogged, LB's sister} wants to change locales (and I'm not talkin' 'bout LC_ALL).
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 1:46 PM
Jeff Goldblum lookalikes
Draw your own conclusions.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 1:47 PM
I think you need to hook lilshahir up.
Posted by Chopper | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 1:51 PM
Yes, why would LB chose Goldblum over Noth as the reference?
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 1:58 PM
I don't watch enough TV to know what Chris Noth looks like. Although, presumably, something like Jeff Goldblum.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 2:01 PM
Does anyone believe that LB didn't watch L&O back in the day? Weak! It's alright, LB - I have barely concealed hostility towards Ogged, too.
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 2:04 PM
L&O? I'm terrible with actor names -- I associated Chris Noth with Sex and the City, which I've never seen. I should know what he looks like from L&O.
(quick visit to IMDB)
Oh, that guy.
It's alright, LB - I have barely concealed hostility towards Ogged, too.
I was thinking I was more in the open ambivalence rather than the barely concealed hostility category. I mean, I am entertaining the thought of fixing him up with the esteemed Dr. Oops, would I do that if I were concealing hostility? (No one who knows her answer that, please.)
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 2:11 PM
Indeed. Chris Noth. Jeff Goldblum. They don't really look alike, do they?
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 2:11 PM
If we're trying to work out what you look like by identifying common features of the two, I think all that we can know for certain is that your brow is furrowed.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 2:13 PM
...putting your lady back in play like that
I like to let him think he has some control over this.
Posted by susan | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 2:14 PM
It's ok, LB. Anyway, as I recall, your sister is 6'1", which is a bit tall for a guy a mere 6'. Labs is the better match.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 2:14 PM
107, 109: It's a participle (appositives are noun phrases), and not dangling--'being taken' applies to 'women', also the antecedent of 'whom'. I vaguely feel as though the problem is that you can't put a participle between 'around whom' and 'he can relax', but I'm not sure. Have to call in a professional.
Hmm... seems like that clause would be obtained from 'Ogged can relax around them', and you can't say 'Ogged can relax around them, being taken'. Can those participles only modify to the subject of the sentence?
I'd say that this illustrates Thurber's dictum, "Not even Henry James could escape intact from a sentence containing a 'which', a 'whom', and a 'being'," but I'd hate to call any of the taken ladies witches.
Posted by Matt Weiner | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 2:16 PM
I like to let him think he has some control over this.
Do you mean to say by this that if he were to break up with you, you wouldn't consider dating anyone else?
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 2:17 PM
What is with the new breed of gigantic women?
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 2:17 PM
Don't move to Holland.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 2:18 PM
Hmphf. Closed-minded tall-phobic person.
(Given that she'd kick my ass if she knew I were shopping her around the Internet, just as well. Sadly, I may not be able to avoid the Johnson fixup -- I really like the mutual friends, and they think it's the greatest idea ever. I will simply have to rely on her innate good taste.)
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 2:18 PM
Hmm... seems like that clause would be obtained from 'Ogged can relax around them', and you can't say 'Ogged can relax around them, being taken'. Can those participles only modify to the subject of the sentence?
You see—this is why we need cases. You can do that in latin, no problem. Except there's no present passive participle (I wonder how you get around that? I probably used to know).
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 2:19 PM
You know, at least you're hostile to me; you haven't even acknowledged the Labs possibility. He doesn't really have undergraduates blowing him, you know.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 2:20 PM
Is Johnson really such an odious fellow?
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 2:21 PM
You know, ben, I used to think you were quite charming.
Posted by susan | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 2:23 PM
I have to ask: given that FL hates basketball despite the fact that he's ginormous and gym-fit, can one in good conscience set him up with a tall Dem? Isn't that sort of a waste of height potential on a child who is less likely to appropriately use it?
Posted by SomeCallMeTim | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 2:23 PM
Old(e) English - back when it was pretty close to old German, Dutch, Icelandic, etc. - had cases, right? Maybe we should just look them up and bring them back.
Has anyone else ever brought up cases in conversation with others about languages only to have someone think you were talking about things like capital letters?
Posted by eb | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 2:23 PM
You know, at least you're hostile to me; you haven't even acknowledged the Labs possibility.
Mostly because he just doesn't give off the same air of desperately needing a date that you do.
Is Johnson really such an odious fellow?
His blogging makes him sound like a bit of a twerp. On the other hand, I like the mutual friends a lot, and they think he's great, so he may not be that bad.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 2:24 PM
At first I thought I was no longer charming because of the comment about participles, until I remembered the distant past of five minutes ago.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 2:26 PM
Isn't that sort of a waste of height potential on a child who is less likely to appropriately use it?
Dr. Oops can safely be relied on to cover the transmission of general jock-type-skills. Medicine wasn't the alternative to a professional ball career, but she's pretty good.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 2:26 PM
he just doesn't give off the same air of desperately needing a date that you do.
I'm going to take this to be your way of saying that I'm a very good blogger.
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 2:30 PM
Indubitably.
Posted by LizardBreath | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 2:31 PM
Re 136--A couple anecdotal data points:
I'm 5'10". The wife's 6'1". It works.
My best friend is 5'9", his wife is 6'3". They work.
You've already said you don't like dancing--what other activities does having a SO taller than you inhibit?
Posted by Chopper | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 2:32 PM
Feeling tall.
Posted by ben wolfson | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 2:33 PM
Shoot me now, Wolfson beat me to it.
(Though I was going to say "puffing myself up.")
Posted by ogged | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 2:34 PM
Ah, but you miss the advantages:
To women, you look good for being secure enough to date/marry a women taller than yourself.
To men, you can say "they're all the same height in bed."
And to my wife, should she ever come across this, I can say, "Ow, Ow, Ow, I'm sorry, Ow, let go of that, Ow."
Posted by Chopper | Link to this comment | 04-27-05 2:50 PM