I skimmed parts of it. I think that some of the points are interesting-ish.
I thought the script was amusing, too. I have not read the book, only left-wing critiques of it.
I'm still confused about why my high-school ex-girlfriend submitted some kind of blurb about herself to the Lean In website. I think it was supposed to be encouraging to other women, but it just details how she aimlessly bounced from one six-figure job to another before finally landing on one she likes. Yeah, sure, why doesn't everyone do that?
The joke, if joke there was, was stretched rather too thin to bother reading all the way through, very much in Slate's we-worship-and-imitate-popular-comedy-because-it-is-popular-not-because-it-is-funny-please-link-to-this-on-social-media-God-I-want-to-be-popular way.
Will this be more like the "Sex and the Single Girl" movie, or the "What to Expect When You're Expecting" movie?
5. I think it will be more like the Mean Girls movie, only without Tina Fey.
Did the left-wing critiques include Susan Faludi's in the Baffler?
Recommend
There was a response to one left-wing critic written by s liberal-ish writer who had been to dinner with her.
Faludi in the Baffler was excellent. Also something in ?the Jacobin? by someone who worked at the company?
Avoiding the book like the plague as well as the lunch events at work where we are all supposed to show up and commiserate / trade tips on managing household help. Gag.
Was the Jacobin article the one that said it's not really about feminism, it's about creating workers willing to work ever more and to give up any kind of non-work life? That one was great.
I haven't read the book, but I browsed it at a bookstore right after it came out. I opened it randomly and read two or three pages. I don't remember exactly what the anecdote and following message were, only that they confirmed my worst suspicions about the book.
I haven't read the book -- generally, self-helpy business writing gives me hives. I have a certain amount of sympathy for it (or, really, for the vague impression I've gotten of it): some of the critiques I read were along the lines of "I thought feminism was supposed about dismantling the patriarchy, and therefore capitalism; talking about how to succeed in a capitalistic workplace isn't feminist at all!"
And that kind of reaction, eh. I mean, I'm as in favor of dismantling capitalism as much as the next democratic socialist (I am cheering on my new mayor attempting to fund universal pre-K with a new tax on high income city residents, not that that's dismantling capitalism either but it's a step in the right direction.) But at the moment, capitalism is still here, as is the patriarchally organized workplace. And it does seem to me that if you're going to be in the patriarchally organized workplace, rather than taking down the system from outside which most of us aren't, there's a feminist value in succeeding rather than failing therein. (I may be arguing with a bit of a straw man here -- I'd have to poke around to look at the critiques I had read.)
This isn't an endorsement of any of the specific advice in Lean In, which, as I said, I haven't read.
generally, self-helpy business writing gives me hives
I think my business casual, non-iron shirts are giving me hives because of the formaldehyde. Which probably doesn't have much to do with feminism, unless my wife wants to start pressing the regular kind of shirt.
I thought I might be allergic to something at work because my nose has been dripping constantly at my desk, but it turns out I've just been tilting my head down at a sinus draining angle to read papers a lot.
If you would lean in, you wouldn't need to tilt your head so much.
Or, there's probably an office neti pot in the supply closet. Just be sure to rinse it out before you put it back.
But then I might drip on my keyboard. Figuring this out has been my only real accomplishment at work lately. I could use some tips on how to succeed in the patriarchy.
Yes Blume that was the one, and it is of a piece in my mind with the more recent article re the pernicious "do what you love" crap. Both articles expose the horrendous trajectory towards turn the educated UMC worker into an endlessly toiling drone convinced of his/her moral superiority and completely dependent on validation thru professional success. Simultaneously, the same UMC dupes are thereby weaned from any impulse of solidarity with the "ordinary" working person. A convenient hat trick for our economy and political overlords but no thanks.
IOW I find the Lean In paradigm repugnant not because insufficiently feminist.
I have not read the book, only left-wing critiques of it.
New mouseover!
IOW I find the Lean In paradigm repugnant not because insufficiently feminist.
This, I can go along with -- repugnant because of its uncritical engagement with psycho workplace norms but not anti-feminist is a possible reaction I can see having (again, from what I know of the book, which doesn't include having read it).
turn the educated UMC worker into an endlessly toiling drone convinced of his/her moral superiority and completely dependent on validation thru professional success. Simultaneously, the same UMC dupes are thereby weaned from any impulse of solidarity with the "ordinary" working person.
Nicely put.
Skip the book LB and read the Baffler and Jacobin articles, much better use of time!
Links for the lazy and my future reference: The Baffler (Susan Faludi) and Jacobin (Melissa Gira Grant) articles.
I don't believe that's really the full Jacobin review.
13: Or maybe it's cerebrospinal fluid!
it is of a piece in my mind with the more recent article re the pernicious "do what you love" crap.
I don't actually know what the connection is between the Lean In crap and the "do what you love" crap, which seem very different. But have I ever commented that one of the things I find most insufferable in the entire world is when independently wealthy people drone on about the importance of spending every day doing what you love and following your passions? This is a frequent theme when rich people give graduation speeches.
[N.B.: I don't actually resent the advice per se, which probably is good life advice, even if it would lead to starvation for most people. I respect people who've made the deliberate choice to do what they love (and have made the consequent life sacrifices), but I can't stomach the advice coming from someone who made no sacrifices at all in order to follow it (either because they've spent their whole life independently wealthy, or because they didn't begin to follow the advice until after they became independently wealthy).]
The links are 1 sense of moral superiority encouraged thru deluding oneself in the way you just described and 2 simultaneously devaluing labor of others who make the overworking"lifestyle" possible. Am frequently counseled to employ vast arrays of domestic labor as the key to professional success such advice never seems to come with any respect for that labor. Also fundamental disparagement of parenting partnering and all non highly monetized labor of my own life in this mindset. This is both politically repugnant to me and antithetical to personal happiness.
I had dinner last night with the woman who aggregates water news and blogs. She was the first to do so, starting in 2004 or 2005. She sold her first aggregator, which really was the go-to source for not-enough and not too long after got booted from her own blog. They were paying her about $15K, which was her family's whole income for a while. Since they booted her, she had to come up with something new, which has been an even better fantastic source for information on water news, plus agency doings. It is a labor of love for her, helped along by the fact that she only sleeps 4-5 hours a night. But she told me they were on food stamps for a while. She just won a grant that'll keep her OK for a year or so.
You know, I should send her name to Ezra. I think her native instinct (and the fact that she thinks about it constantly) for understanding how information about water can be presented online isn't matched elsewhere.
Anyway, she's doing what she loves and has paid dearly in time and effort and standard of living.
I, too, endorse 17. Barf, and also barf.
23: Err, you're right. I should have noticed if for no reason than that it's entirely too short for Jacobin, but I was in a hurry before a meeting. My Google-Fu is failing me; is the actual review online anywhere?
26: From what little I've read, she seemed interested in getting men to step it up. I am in a library now and will see if their copy is on the shelf.
Megan:
Did you happen to see Michael O'Hare geeking out about the Bay Bridge crane at Samefacts.com this morning? Thought of you right away.
I'm always fortified by accounts like yours above, about persistence and excellence despite non-success, conventionally and all too realistically understood.
Yes! That is a remarkable crane. I should ask my sister if she knows anything about it.
I am very cold right now. I think that I am a wimp who can't stomach cool temperatures anymore. My guess is that the temperature and humidity are set at the ideal setting for preserving books. (The print room has separate climate control.)
And, despite silk long underwear, a collared shirt, a sweater and a fleece, I am quite cold.
This thread is perfect for me today, I'm just mildly grumpy (also happy, I made lot of progress yesterday on a project which has been driving me crazy for the past couple of weeks -- so my grumpiness may just be residual tension which now lacks a focus).
it just details how she aimlessly bounced from one six-figure job to another before finally landing on one she likes. Yeah, sure, why doesn't everyone do that?
Heh, isn't the final sentence the stereotypical obnoxious comment by people who work in programming?
re the pernicious "do what you love" crap.
Anyway, she's doing what she loves and has paid dearly in time and effort and standard of living.
I may have missed the pernicious version of "do what you love," but my first reaction is still to find it admirable when people are doing something that they are passionate about.
... and completely dependent on validation thru professional success
I'm convinced that this is one of the many pernicious effects of white collar jobs that demand consistently long hours at the office -- people don't have time to cultivate other sources of validation.
I am finding it pretty admirable that I am still doing laundry every day. I still haven't decided what my sticker chart reward will be, but something.
I admire her quite a bit and would love to see her paid to match her talent and work.
I may have missed the pernicious version of "do what you love," but my first reaction is still to find it admirable when people are doing something that they are passionate about.
Doing what one loves is rather different from exhorting people to do what they love (for a living), given that the latter is not actually an option or not a wise option for many. Feel free to admire those who love what they do!
33.2: You forgot pants. That helps.
What rfts and also tremendous social pressure in white collar professional jobs to convince oneself that overworking *is* what you love.
Oh yes, definitely 39. If you don't love every aspect of this job, maybe you should get out of the way and give it to someone who does!
Doing what one loves is rather different from exhorting people to do what they love (for a living),
I understand what you mean, but how do you feel about, for example, Shopcraft as Soulcraft?
. . . tremendous social pressure in white collar professional jobs to convince oneself that overworking *is* what you love.
Ah yes, there is an old Dilbert cartoon about employers taking advantage of cognitive dissonance. It shows Dilbert thinking, "Why am I here? I work too hard and am badly paid. . . . . I must love my work"
38: I am wearing pants/trousers, even if I neglect to include that in my description. I now have the book in hand, if anyone has a question abotu the actual text.
Wow, Dairy Queen is amazing today -- I want some of these comments put on posters and t-shirts all over town as part of a manifesto. Right on.
Doing what you love is especially easy if what you love is telling other people to do what they love.
I love getting hammered and playing video games until sunrise, but nobody will pay me for it.
Maybe if they repealed the minimum wage.
47 made me laugh. In fact, 45-47 all made me laugh. In fact, this thread has been unexpectedly funny, maybe in a darkly true way.
Wait, the rest of you aren't getting paid for these comments?
I once had lunch with Larry Summers, and his career advice to me (which he said was his standard career advice he gives all young people starting their careers) was to "Pick one thing that interests you, any one thing that interests you, and become recognized as the world's leading expert on that thing." That was the entirety of his advice. This was unsolicited advice. I didn't ask him for career advice.
Dear Ms. Weisz,
I know you don't know me and haven't responded to my earlier messages, but no I write on the advice of a former Secretary of the Treasury.
52. Dude, you seem nice and all, but no means no.
"Pick one thing that interests you, any one thing that interests you, and become recognized as the world's leading expert on that thing."
Seriously, ask me anything about gravity bongs.
Wait a few years and swipe your kid's bong.
37, 39: Exactly. It is awesome if you're lucky enough to do what you love and make a living at it. That does not mean that "do what you love" is good career advice, nor does it mean that if you are doing something and maybe not loving it but just friends with benefits with it, that you are unworthy of the job. (This last more applicable to the academy, perhaps.)
||
Just interviewed a very pleasant young man from Columbia Law, who showed up ten minutes early for his interview. So not everyone from the Ivy League is a jerk. And his writing sample was properly proofread, which Chip's wasn't.
|>
There's that old saying, "If you can't be with the career you love, love the career you're with."
Sounds like someone has a sense of superiority and inferiority! Hopefully he's a perfectionist.
60: But did he have an amusing name? You should make that a part of intern selection criteria from now on.
He did have a funny name! Not in any way associated with a particular stereotype, but distinctly peculiar.
What kind of dove is dumb enough to fly with an eagle?
I like "You keep a baby in your desk?" from the linked article.
I haven't read Lean In, but my sister (who just had a baby), is reading it and finding it thought-provoking, at least, and I think inspirational, not so much because of the advice, but simply because there are stories of women who had kids and careers in the book. Role models can be hard to come by in engineering.
"Pick one thing that interests you, any one thing that interests you, and become recognized as the world's leading expert on that thing."
Step 1: Assassinate Chris Sims, the world's leading Batmanologist.
For now.
Batmanologist
I've done my share of abusing the English language, but that's over the fucking line.
"Pick one thing that interests you, any one thing that interests you, and become recognized as the world's leading expert on that thing."
This is a gold mine for the lazy, insane, and self-involved. I am the world's leading expert -- and recognized as such -- on Halfordismo.
[more seriously, isn't that, theoretically at least, what every single person in the world with a Ph.D. is doing? ]
70: Batmanomy is real science, Batmanology is just gibberish.
I am just dying to know what thing urple chose! I'm not sure I could narrow my guesses sufficiently.
71.last: That's what professors in my Ph.D. program told me to do.
I am just dying to know what thing urple chose!
He's LB's favorite commenter, isn't that enough?
Batmanomy is real science, Batmanology is just gibberish
How is the layman to know the difference? Genuine Batmanomousness might be hard to distinguish from gibberish.
Ph.D. students are supposed to become an expert on their chosen topic, but are hardly expected to become the world's leading expert.
I mean, you weren't supposed to become the world's leading expert on "Congress" or anything, but you were supposed to find something narrow enough that no other single person in the world could give a shit.
77: If your dissertation is really original research you're the world's leading expert on it's topic up until you tell your advisor about your insights, at which point the bastard gains an edge on you due to superior experience. That's why you should kill them and eat them after graduation, like those horrible little spiders that eat the mommies.
Right, not the leading expert in a broad field, but, say in history, to know more about some particular village in Romania between 1643 and 1653 THAN ANY PERSON ON EARTH.
but you were supposed to find something narrow enough that no other single person in the world could give a shit.
I hear people say this kind of thing all the time, and I think it's really horrible advice to give grad students. If you're working on something that's interesting there are probably going to be at least a couple of people in the world who know it better than you do.
Honestly, probably the best career advice I've ever heard was from my grandfather. I actually thought it was a joke when he said it, but I think he was dead serious, and the older I've gotten the better his advice seems. (I didn't follow the advice, but I've sort of regretted it, and think my life would be better if I had.) His advice was: "(1) Get out a blank piece of paper. (2) Write down your three favorite things to do. (3) Figure out which one of those three things pays the best, and make that your career."
If I actually tried to do this, I don't think I would make it past step 2.
Well of course you're going to be the world's leading expert on the topic of "what is written in my thesis." Since, you're the only person who will have read the whole thing. But that's only a "topic" in a really artificial sense. For any actual topic (not artificially restricted) you're not going to be the world's leading expert yet.
I mean, at least for some appropriately narrow definition of "my field," there are very few grad students in it who can't tell me what they're up to where I wouldn't immediately know what they're talking about and, usually, why it's a stupid thing to be wasting their time on.
If I read our guidelines correctly, full professors really should be the world's leading expert in something, but for associate professor it's enough to be the country's leading expert.
Here presumably full professors are supposed to be the galaxy's leading expert in fifty different somethings.
Like sending incomprehensible messages from one's Blackberry or getting oneself onto panel discussions with movie stars.
My stepdaugher is the world's leading authority on clothes worn by cartoon characters.
...why it's a stupid thing to be wasting their time on.
This seems to indicate a rather dim view of the competence of the advisors of the grad students in question. At least their competence to be advising anybody, that is.
Having no idea what I'm talking about, isn't there a plausible category of research problems that are self-contained and interesting enough to demonstrate the competence necessary for a PhD, but still mostly a waste of time, because most actually interesting problems require too much time/resources/something to be practical for a dissertation?
90: Maybe it's more of an indication of essear's general cynicism about his field.
91: A friend of mine wrote his dessertation on such a set of problems, but it was OK becuase he never intended to do anything but go to wall street and make a shit-ton of money. His dissertation was just a way to show he's smart and can do hard math.
Well, OK, but Larry Summers didn't say become the world's leading expert on an actually interesting or important topic. He just said become the world's leading expert on something in the world that you find somewhat interesting. That could be totally satisfied by knowing more than anyone else about some completely worthless topic in physics!
I am well on track to becoming the world's leading expert in something nobody else finds particularly interesting.
People are fascinated by Killer Robots whenever they encounter them. Briefly fascinated, but that's all you can expect.
Your recent paper seemed pretty interesting.
Someone here (LB maybe? I can't remember) claimed to have close to exhaustive knowledge of the Unfogged archives.
Is it possible to get a PhD out of that?
97: maybe I'm just extrapolating from how hard it is to get my adviser interested.
Food treats often help. Have you tried freeze-dried liver?
91: I'd say you're exactly right. The really, really neat stuff in my field is usually either interdisciplinary, very expensive, or both. It normally takes 5-6 years to get a PhD, with the first three consisting mostly of making dumb mistakes and ruining things. The final two or three years are when grad students actually become sort of competent. (UK disclaimer: PhD is three years, and the students come out about the same level as a fourth year US student.) If you gave a single student a really cool, self-contained project, they'd either waste tons of money screwing things up for a few years, or they'd end up dilettantes in two or three subfields. Some schools encourage advisors to give out Master's projects, which are designed to be accessible and completed in a student's first two years so they can publish and see how running a research project goes. I think it's a very nice idea and wish more places did stuff like that.
Vice versa, actually, and it was profiteroles and lamb shanks. I came back from the Peace Corps lean, hungry, and ready to spend some time in small French restaurants in Soho.
One of the very best things about aging is that by the time one is about 50, one can give up pretty much every ambition there is, except to try to have a little fun before the body gives out altogether.
91: Yes, I think it's pretty hard to get your hands on a truly interesting project when you're a grad student, because whenever an interesting project turns up, your adviser will want to make sure it's done (1) properly and (2) as quickly as possible, which usually means giving it to someone with more experience.
"Pick one thing that interests you, any one thing that interests you, and become recognized as the world's leading expert on that thing."
Also misleading advice, because many good researchers have scary amounts of expertise about multiple things.
One of the very best things about aging is that by the time one is about 50, one can give up pretty much every ambition there is, except to try to have a little fun before the body gives out altogether.
But what if one does not like fun?
Be honest, LB. Would freeze-dried liver treats worked equally well?
The expensive ones? Maybe. He never tried.
11: but I think that 'lean in' feminism actively valorizes and propagandizes for some pretty bad kinds of neoliberal values. See this excellent article by Nancy Fraser, How Feminism Became Capitalism's Handmaiden" .
105: The assisted living that my parents are at has a resident who went to the police academy in Seattle in her 70's.
105:
Certainly feel I've got a lot more perspective, particularly about ambition, than I had even a few years ago. I really feel this when working with younger colleagues, in their 40s, say. And I'm grateful for health and comfort every day as it gets more and more unusual among my peers.
But I also have more of a sense of unfinished business than you express here. You've enjoyed professional success, and have taken risks to do admirable things. I admire that; I also feel that compared with you, I've still got something to prove.
112.2 -- You're too kind. I've come to think, though, that much that one might seek to prove is illusion.
If my computer could cut and paste, I'd quote Gustav Adolf Ekdahl's monologue from Fanny & Alexander that begins the world is a den of thieves and night is falling . . .
The world is a den of thieves and night is falling and we're all bozos on this bus.
I'm just hoping my tendons hold together for another half marathon and the construction of a cob house.
In case you've forgotten. As you can see, it doesn't get to the bit I quoted until 2:58 . . .
Moby, there ought to be some better way to keep the cob together than sacrificing your own tendons.
Huh. I'm 47, kind of frustrated, looking forward to being able to try heavier lifting (that is, riskier, less predictable work) when my kid leaves home in 5 years.
It doesn't feel like ambition exactly-- I don't care much if I'm acknowledged for it, but I'd rather do something difficult well or fail at it and go again than to make moderate progress within the boundaries of what is prudent. My fear is that this attitude is actually an escape fantasy, a consoling lie.
Here's the "do what you love" article, for those who haven't seen it. It's quite good.
I bet the author enjoyed writing it.
124 -- You New Yorkers never understand anything!
They renamed the states so that populations correspond to area.
That was my guess. But, and no offense to teo, I really don't want to live in rainy Alaska.
Hey, it hasn't rained for a couple days now!
I'm 47, kind of frustrated, looking forward to being able to try heavier lifting
Take it from me, avoid heavy deadlifts with that underhand grip.
Fortunately, I figured out what was coming before seeing that one again. Don't need to see it once more.
127: oh, well in that case, fine. I mean, it rained here yesterday, so it's dry there by comparison. Of course that was only the second time water fell from the sky in about a year, so.
In time, California will dry out entirely, and its population will relocate to a warmer, wetter Alaska.
129:
It's educational, Mr. " hoping my tendons hold together for another half marathon". That bicep stuff doesn't give me near the willies that the thought of snapping my Achilles does.
In time
This July, you mean? Yeah, probably. But by then we'll have relocated, so whatever.
Wow, jump to :42 and look how thick the Achilles is. It's like they're stitching a big meaty rope back together.
133: wait, what? It's a fait accompli?
Yeah, I was wondering about that too.
A rare (I hope) side effect of Cipro, apparently, is spontaneous severe tendon damage. I had to take a round of it three years ago and just tiptoed around in mortal terror for two weeks. I remember trying to retrain myself not to worry about my tendons afterwards.
136: no, not yet. But it's looking much more likely than I would have thought a few months back.
138: That happened to one of my co-workers with the tendons in his knee a few months ago. It was scary to hear him talk about it.
Although he seems fine now, so I guess they were able to repair the damage.
139: I am going to laugh my ass off in about a year. Also, I look forward to actually meeting you once you live on the other side of the country.
142: every single person I've talked to who lives there with their kids says it's somewhat boring and isolated but very pleasant: beautiful landscapes, good public schools, relatively affordable. The department is outstanding and very collegial. The university is public but a flagship campus, and thus comparatively safe during hard times. And the chair has been held by two of the leading figures in my field. Plus, my family and several of our best friends live 3ish hours away. Again, we haven't made a final decision, but it's a pretty appealing offer.
I tend to think the fact that you hated it there as an undergraduate probably doesn't have a lot of predictive value for us. For my part, I didn't much like Madison, WI, where I got my BA. But having been back a few times through the years, it's obviously a great place to live. I don't know; I think it's just that my priorities have changed considerably. Also, remember that we don't live in the Bay Area. We like Davis quite a lot, but it's the Central Valley.
I've spent much of my career managing large, successful groups in tech during my 30+ year career. There are so many issues with micro prejudices against woman it's hard to write a sensible note. Still, Sandberg gives really good advice for a certain class of women working in this industry. My wife has found it very useful, as an anecdata. Sandberg essentially accepts the prejudice that exist and talks about how to work through it. It isn't a call to arms for change, but professional women do get good advice for the sexist world of today.
DN
143, 144: I was specifically thinking of the weather (hence a year from now). And while you're right that some of the things that I hated about it probably won't be issues for you, I'm afraid on your behalf that some of them may be; I'm thinking of things like the relative lack of academic engagement on students' part, or the extent to which the athletic department warps the university's priorities. OTOH it's been 20 years since I was there and I've heard anecdotal reports that the school has made academic excellence much more of a priority since then.
And hey, at the very least if you do move there I have a couple of people you should say hi to on my behalf.
55: I just might have to ask you about gravity bongs, since I really can't work out from the wikipedia page how you are supposed to get the smoke into yourself. The author has perhaps researched too enthusiastically.
||Ugh. Another partner in my division is being let go. The last person had productivity issues to justify this sort of thing. But this person has been a steady, consistent worker for 20 some years and is being dumped in favor of youth and greatee earnings for the 1%. It sickens me.|>
When I was just a little young boy, Papa said "Son, you'll never get far, I'll tell you the reason if you want to know, 'cause child of mine, there isn't really very far to go."
139: What?!! You just took on a new position at your current school too.
138: For whatever reason my sleep specialist (a neurologist) decided that she had to warn me about the dangers of cipro which she said they give out like candy. I sort of know why; she was clicking through all of my medical records and saw the earlier visit for tendonitis.
148:
Huh. This is still going on. I was very aware of it around 2008, during the mass extinctions, but thought it had about run out.
Now I've spent my career "a million miles from LaSalle street," as the old saying had it, so I have no idea how much de-partnering has always gone on, or whether it was once very rare, in a constantly expanding profession/economy, that now seems to have had a lot of slack in it, although it didn't seem so then.
I'm actually much more involved in big cases now as a temp than any time in my almost 30 years at the bar. I'm often assembling dep binders, or pulled out to work with an associate on focused searches, developing whole lines of inquiry. Genuinely interesting stuff.
But the firms themselves, their dynamics and politics, remain utterly opaque to me.
I'd been meaning to congratulate di on her becoming a partner, something I'd hoped for but had cut myself off from knowing for the past few years. I'm still doing that, right here/right now. But I hope the obvious rejoinder isn't the old Chicago saying: "That, plus $2.25, gets you on the El."
That's pretty cheap. We don't even have an El and it's $2.50 for the shortest bus trip.
In time, California will dry out entirely, and its population will relocate to a warmer, wetter Alaska.
Because they like the time zone and Alaska has the earthquakes they're used to.
143: FWIW, that university seems to be doing some great things with the library.
Here's something about the "Northward shift," due to climate change, that isn't clear to me.
I've read stories about the line, above which you can't get crop insurance for corn, creeping northward a few miles every year, based on actuarial calculations. It's now in Saskatchewan somewhere. There's presumably a corresponding line, maybe in the panhandle or southern Kansas, at the southern edge of the insurable zone.
Now here in Illinois, the topsoil is yards thick: grasslands and prairie fires, buffalo herds, lawyer bullshit. It's taken thousands of years to build up. In A Sand County Almanac, written in the forties, Aldo Leopold described what core analysis was already telling ecologists. There had been times since the last ice age when the prairie reached the shores of Lake Superior, and other times when the boreal forest reached into Illinois. There are patches of both scattered north and south through the range: Volo bog, in Lake County Illinois has Tamaracks growing around it; red or Norway pines grow along the Des Plaines into the Illinois downstream as far as Starved Rock. But most of the time in the last 20,000 years, the transition between ecozones has been about where it is now.
This means we have a few decades of slack, where the topsoil supports the level of agriculture we need it to, but the farther north you go, the thinner it's going to get, because it's spent far less of the time as grassland. So the soil up there isn't going to support the yield we need no matter how warm it gets.
Am I right about this?
Still, Sandberg gives really good advice for a certain class of women working in this industry.
There's a tension between the ethic of personal conservatism that we try to adhere to in our own lives, and the ethic of social liberalism that is appropriate when thinking about the world at large.
So every sensible liberal acknowledges that we ought to aspire to the "conservative" virtues of self-reliance, personal responsibility and taking action based on the assumption that our efforts matter - that we aren't screwed no matter what we do; that working harder will pay off.
But every sensible person acknowledges that those virtues aren't all that matters - that there are factors at work in society that are outside our individual control, and that must therefore be addressed by all of us.
Sandberg gets into trouble - as most conservatives do - by papering over this distinction* and pretending that individual self-help is the way to address a societal problem. Bill Cosby gets into trouble the same way. The effect - whether intentional or not - is to heap scorn on the less privileged, and to absolve ourselves, as a society, of blame for matters that we are clearly responsible for.
*Or maybe she doesn't. I haven't actually read the book, of course.
157:
Exactly, and very clearly expressed.
A classic exposition of this dilemma, the necessary double-mindedness between our free wills, what we can accomplish versus what we can't, what the circumstances, cosmic or otherwise determine, a question central to our national thought since Jonathan Edwards, is in Emerson's great late essay, Fate
Looking over the Amazon blurb for Sandberg's book (because I'm a scholar who cites primary sources), you'll see this:
In Lean In, Sheryl Sandberg examines why women's progress in achieving leadership roles has stalled, explains the root causes, and offers compelling, commonsense solutions that can empower women to achieve their full potential.
Well, no. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with self-help, but judging from the Lean In organization's PR, they've got very little interest in the "root causes" of "why women's progress in achieving leadership roles has stalled."
*Or maybe she doesn't. I haven't actually read the book, of course.
The reviews I have read indicate that she at least acknowledges some societal problems as things that should be addressed societally, but then focuses on the individual responses as things individuals can do now.
I think some of the objections to the book amount to a requirement that feminism be too good for this world: saying that feminists are allowed to work to improve the world in a way that will allow women to have equal access to power without accepting the wrongful ways in which access to power is structured generally, but that they may not work towards equal access to power in the world as it currently exists without being censured for it. And I've got mixed feelings about that: obviously, there are ways of accessing power that are just pernicious, and no one should do them. But if something is forgivable for men, it should be forgivable for women.
It seems like the whole thing boils down to "Men are more assertive than women. Be more assertive or a man will be promoted instead of you.""
161: But not too assertive, because then you'll be a bitch.
162: I think that she acknowledges that this is unfair. But as an individual on the job, I can't run consciousness-raising sessions that will be meaningful. She can to a certain extent.
I haven't read the book but had understood its message to be a sort of trojan-horse feminism. "This is all terribly unfair, but it's the way the system is, and women without power can't do much to change things, so you have to work the system as it is to gain power, and here's how you do that, and then once there enough women in the powerful inner circles, we'll be in a position to make the whole system better."
That, I think is probably kind of bullshit -- that is, people who get to power by functioning successfully in a given system are not terribly likely to be driven to change it significantly, which is why law firms are such lousy places.
163: I haven't read the book, so I don't really know, but I was assuming that 161's summary needed an acknowledgement that "be more assertive, like a man" was incomplete without some modification. It would be ridiculous of Sandberg not to acknowledge that it's not as straightforward as 161. And yes to 165. I can't even imagine what I'd change if I had the power to make a company work differently. Hell, I don't even do enough as a peon.
165,166 Even without a fully-developed self-consistent ideological program, having the clout to disable or remove the most toxic individuals is enough to make a huge improvement. Even having the ability to hit back or to request undeniable documentation can make a difference.
Doesn't lend itself well to a cartoon summary.
167.1:
Have you witnessed, or heard a credible report of someone actually doing this?
Aren't we talking about literal sexual discrimination lawsuits or the sort of HR proceedings that can forestall such a lawsuit by resolving the problem. (Sexual discrimination not limited to sexual harassment, to be clear: "I'm not promoting you because you're a woman" doesn't have to be accompanied by sexual advances.) Things like that certainly happen.
And, to be clear, happen more easily the more there are women in power within the organization.
I want to think so but a story would help my understanding.
170: Are you saying that NOT promoting women happens more easily when there are more women in an organization. If that is what you're saying would you mind fleshing that out, because I'm not following you.
OT: I have a cold and am hacking away. It is kind of painful to talk. I haven't taken any OTC cold remedies or cough suppressants, because I tend to think that they convince you that you are better and then overexert yourself. I have one commitment today. Should I cancel and stay in bed (which I don't really want to do) or take some medicine and suck it up?
No, no. I meant that the kind of pushback lw was talking about, neutralizing a toxic person who is actively discriminating against female employees, is going to be easier when there are more women in relatively powerful positions. I should stop saying "to be clear" when I'm not being clear.
173: Let me be the first to suggest you lean in.
173: That makes so much more sense. I just reread what you wrote more slowly and realized that that must be what you meant.
175: It didn't feel like I was being totally off-topic when I wrote the comment.
Anyway, I don't take decongestants because they make me feel bad. I don't take cough medicines because I can't get the kind you can make purple dank with.
I think cancelling depends on (1) is it a face to face with someone you have to impress? Because if you're sick enough to be gross, you might want to stay home. (And on a non-esthetic front, are you likely to spread your cold?) and (2) how much more of a hassle will it be to reschedule? It might be literally less effort to just do it. But it's hard to tell without being there.
179: It's a doctor's appointment. No need to impress. I don't need to reschedule since it's a regularly recurring one.
Oh, then if missing it isn't going to screw up your medical care importantly, stay home and don't give the other patients in the waiting room your cold.
If you go while having a bad cold, the doctor may give you the kind of cough medicine you can make purple dank with.
I had a horrible, literally months-long cold last fall (thanks daycare!), and I didn't want to take any of the usual decongestants because I was still pumping at work and worried about drying myself up too much. I finally discovered phenylephrine nose spray. Lots of the positive effects of decongestants, without the systemic drying-up and the yucky speedy feeling.
It's a psychiatrist. Maybe one other patient waiting for the doctor he shares his office space with might be affected. Unlikely that anyone else will be there. He's not going to do anything for the cold.
183: This one doesn't have that much congestion. Just a bit of a sore throat which tickles and leads to lots of coughing with some phlegm. And then pain in the back of my throat when talking--which I would have to do if I went to the appointment.
I think some of the objections to the book amount to a requirement that feminism be too good for this world
I vaguely remember a self-help book from some years or decades ago that said that men are evil, unethical and criminal on the job, so women also need to be, because feminism. I found this thesis ... provocative.
184: I was guessing that -- what I meant is presumably it's not going to mean difficulty renewing a necessary prescription or anything, which would make it worth hauling yourself in. If that's not an issue, stay home, nap, and drink tea.
186: I join you in your blanket condemnation of criminal behavior.
And evil. I'm also opposed to evil.
Right. Evil? Totally out of the question. Still, kind of subjective. Some gray areas.
Would anyone care to join me in hating United Airlines? And DIA?
Aren't they covered under a sub-clause of Godwin's Law yet?
The hometown airline? The hometown panopticon?
How many details can you share?
191: I am flying them to Denver in a few weeks. JetBlue damaged a ski case on the same flight. I can't hate them too much.
150: I was hired to do a specific job, which I've done (or very nearly done). They'd like me to stay on and administer the thing I've done, but that would mean ever more meetings, which would mean less time to do the things that I like: writing and teaching. Still, this thing is kind of cool, so I'm torn.
146: yeah, those are things for sure. On the other hand, the undergraduate teaching I do here, when I'm not doing this particular thing I was hired to do this year, is mostly huge lectures. Are the students engaged? They might be! But maybe not! And most of my time -- again, until this year, that is -- has been devoted to graduate students, which will be the case there as well. The athletics stuff? I don't know. WE ARE! Eh, whatever.
At least you'll be moving closer to the region where wineries grow Concord grapes. You get better wine when you use the same grapes as used for Welch's.
188, 189: That's not what I said! I'm keeping an open mind.
197: Stanley's coblogger at his other blog made this really pleasant but bizarre concord grape wine. It tasted like alcoholic grape soda, but in a good way: not like wine, but not bad as a strange alcoholic beverage if you like grape flavor.
Stanley's coblogger was named Manischewitz?
No, Manischewitz is straightforwardly horrible. Stanley's coblogger made something nice that just wasn't much like wine.
||
Today's interview is for an undergrad intern, not a law student. His writing sample is on why Social Security is doomed and we need to cut benefits. I am again bracing myself to be fair.
|>
I'm keeping an open mind too, and would love to believe in the amelioration due to diversity alluded to above.
But at the risk of my being stabbed in the eye with an eyeglass screwdriver, it seems to me the promoted person from the previously excluded group is not much to pin hopes on, especially in an environment of stalled revolutions and meaness, within amoral organizations.
Keith Humphreys suggested why in this excerpt from his film recommendation a couple of weeks ago, The Spy Who Came in From the Cold:
A small example of the film's understated, even at times cryptic, storytelling style is the scene where Werner asks for some paperwork from his underling Peters (Sam Wanamaker, memorably creepy). The seated, lame, Wanamaker extends his hand but not far enough. Rather than step forward, Werner waits until Wanamaker struggles to his feet and hands it to him. Burton starts to laugh derisively. The subtext which the film expects you to understand: Werner is the boss but as a Jew, he will never be fully respected by his German underlings. A small moment, a sly moment, a powerful moment, brought across with no comment other than Burton's mad laughs at Wanamaker's expense.
Pretty much, "in an environment of stalled revolutions and meaness, within amoral organizations" nothing's going to work. If that's where you're stuck, you're just pretty much screwed. But that doesn't describe everywhere at all times.
So where does the American corporation rank on the Stasi index?
Second-order Godwin's violation, I know, but that's the context.
205: Plus, if you can have some women putting down the revolutions and behaving amorally, isn't that an improvement in and of itself?
Reminds me of Joseph Heller's advice on public schools. Surely we can spend less money on them, get the same crappy results and thus make an important advance for sound public policy.
206: Depends on the corporation? I mean, there are good and bad places to work, run by good and bad people.
||
Hey, LB, random NY appellate practice/style question. I'm used to putting a "Summary of Argument" section in an appellate brief because it's required by the federal rules. But I kind of also think it's helpful to give the court a roadmap.
I'm writing something for the Appellate Division (First Department, if that matters) now and it doesn't look like a separate summary is required. Is it unusual to add one anyway? Or if I do, am I going to look like a jerk who can't be bothered to remember what court I'm in?
|>
This comment is probably a-holish even for me, but I'm curious as to why hypothetical eastern university which is not in any way known for condoning child rape would have a graduate program in h/istory at all. Where are those people going to work? Or is that not the point.
Where are what people going to work? Are you implying that there should be only five or ten graduate programs in history nationwide (possibly a fair assertion), or implying something particularly bad about that one?
209: I don't do a lot of appellate work, so I'm not actually sure how they'd react to a slightly non-standard brief. What's a summary of argument, though, that's not in your preliminary statement? Is it just a different title for your preliminary statement, or are you doing pretty much the same thing twice in different forms?
(Also, have you tried asking your appellate printers? They might have someone on staff who can answer questions on the line between form and substance.)
211.1 was the thought, not 211.2 particularly, except that I didn't think that HEUWINKIAWKFCCR was particularly known for its programs in that area.
How are they supposed to get better if they can't hire away faculty from drought-stricken places?
Also, have you tried asking your appellate printers?
I just want to want to point out what a good suggestion this is. Help is all around you if you think to ask.
211: I think he's saying that why would anyone want to employ or even go to a meet up with someone from said university. Hint: he means Josh.
Thanks! Checking with the printer is a good idea.
I had the preliminary statement as a one-or-two page thing at the beginning, before the factual background or procedural history. Basically: "Here are the most important points I want you thinking about when you read this brief," without attempting to be comprehensive. I would call that an "introduction" in a federal brief.
Then a summary of argument is a four-page road-map that comes after the procedural history but before the main argument. It sets forth the major points we're going to make in the argument, but without discussion of cases (maybe sometimes one might cite a key case if we really think it is controlling, but that's not the situation here).
So I don't think of it as doing the same thing twice, but it might strike a judge that way who isn't used to the format.
Yeah, I really hardly ever do any appellate work, but that's an unfamiliar structure to me. I don't know how an NY judge would react to it.
Test it on an inconspicuous corner of the judge before applying to the whole thing.
209 -- the usual way of handling this issue in California state practice (which come to think I'm pretty sure I did on the I think 2 appellate briefs I wrote in NY state court a long time ago, I will check) is to do what LB suggests and have something like a "summary of argument" in the introduction or preliminary statement, but not a formal "summary of argument" section at the same place you would in a federal brief. So you get the same basic benefit of the summary of argument section but without setting it up identically to a federal brief.*
*Then of course there's the non-standard California citation system about which the less said the better.
Test it on an inconspicuous corner of the judge before applying to the whole thing.
Small piece under a microscope will usually tell you what you need, but sometimes you have to burn it to be sure.
218, 220: Thanks again!
219: Heh. If I knew which judges to test it on I would have an associate scouring Westlaw and the web for their past opinions, backgrounds, history, favorite sports teams, and preferred beverages. Sadly we do not get to know that in advance at the appellate level.
210: they shrank the size of their program from about 100 students to about 30 students recently. This is one of the very appealing things about the place. At any rate, those 30 are all in one of three areas, including mine. They get jobs, apparently, because the department has good faculty in those areas.
I guess I have a hard time seeing past 1- the weather and 2- the fact that it's, well, the university you're now at versus the other one.
I get that our state has been undermining/starving/cannibalizing the university system for two generations, and I imagine that must be particularly demoralizing from the inside, but--has any other state not been doing that? This system has much farther to fall, and while that makes it more tragic, it's still what it is--and I didn't think it had any serious competition for the title of "best public university system".
Moreover, hasn't a lot of CA's problem been driven by the effective supermajority requirements for taxation--and isn't there now some legitimate hope that the combination of a Democratic supermajority and widespread frustration with the gridlock of the past will actually provide some impetus to change this?
My main reaction is just, "Won't somebody think of the children?" When I was growing up, we'd often go visit my father's family in Davis. Every time, I just couldn't understand--why on earth had my father left, doomed his future children to face snow, sleet, rain, and just generally not having every day be gorgeous? Of course, later I learned the answer: escaping an abusive parent! But that's not the point here.
--why on earth had my father left, doomed his future children to face snow, sleet, rain, and just generally not having every day be gorgeous
Knife in my heart!
(Having taken J. from Santa Barbara (where, admittedly, I had no ongoing job) to snow, sleet, rain, and whatever it is Halford says clings to Ohio.)
Okay, especially after seeing 225/6, I apologize for 224. That was out of line; I know essentially nothing about VW's situation.
Also, I apologize for having used the past instead of the present participle in the sentence RFTS quoted.
224: This 4th generation Californian understands the desire to leave, or at least how it's impractical to go back. The state is imploding and the cost of staying is prohibitive.
That said: my father absolutely loves cycling, and I don't actually enjoy anything, but he's in the northeast, and I'm in California, so I'm riding outside 5 times a week, in short sleeves, with gorgeous views, while he's riding on rollers in a chilly basement.
228 may actually cut the other way, though. It's hard to come back, and will likely only get harder. But if you're already here, leaving means giving up that insider status. I have no idea if VW owns a house, but the resident/non-resident tuition difference at the UCs is over 20k a year, it seems.
230: True. I only have one sibling left out there and that's because she married a dude with a trust fund.
... anyway, now I really will stop pretending I know what's best for WV's family. Sorry!
VW, not WV, for fuck's sake. That's it, internet; we're done. For the night.
227: I'm sorry, I didn't mean to make you feel genuinely bad!
224: it matters a lot that I'm not at one of the two flagship campuses. Which is to say, yes, every state is hell-bent on destroying its system of public education -- not just universities, but K-12 as well -- and so it's particularly important to be at a flagship campus if one wants to weather the storm. (Do you see what I did there? I pivoted to weather.)
And speaking of weather, it's a huge deal. As is the landscape. But again, the landscape here, in Davis, is flat. Our six-year-old often remarks on how very ugly Davis is. "Daddy, why is there no forest here? Why are the mountains so far away? Why don't we live near the beach?" And because we mostly spend our time here and not in the mountains or the forest or at the beach, the existence of those places isn't necessarily all that relevant.
I mean, I went to Stinson Beach yesterday, and it was spectacular. But it's at least 1.5 hours away. Berkeley is an hour away (and Josh is there, so it's off limits). San Francisco is 1.25 hours away. These distances are not huge. But with kids, who have to go to school and swim practice and to their friends' houses, how often do surmount them? Not all that often!
the cost of staying is prohibitive
This is also very true. I am quite well paid, and we still can't afford to save money here. It's not the end of the world, because saving is for suckas, but still.
Also, if I were a full professor at UCSB, and we somehow owned a home there, I don't think we'd ever leave. Again, we live in the Central Valley not on (or even near) the beach or mountains.
Anyway, it's not like we're thinking of moving somewhere truly awful and childhood-destroying. Like Cleveland.
236.last: Unlike the many beaches, liberal urban meccas and former counterculture hubs present right there in Centre County! Of course there are some bits which go up and down that have trees on them.
But I can see you are in full on convince yourself mode (which I recognize after having made a similar CA->PA* decision 28 years ago) so don't let me dissuade you. And I actually mean that.
*Yes, a different part of PA.
238: Exactly. A couple guys I grew up with who are cops in So Cal have to live way the hell out in Fontana to afford anything and I honestly can't figure out why they bother to stay.
The main difference between you and me would be that if I were torn over making such a move the last thing I would do would be to come clean about it in front of this crowd. Not one of us have your best interests at heart*. But I trust your tenured-faculty level of reasoning and self-deception powers to shield you from believing you're listening to any of us anyway.
*Well maybe, Thorn, Witt, Teo, and Kraab but that would only be accidental-like do to being fundamentally decent people, not because they actually care about you.
you are in full on convince yourself mode
This is actually not true. We are truly on the fence. I was just replying to trapnel's points. Had someone said that staying here is the wrong thing to do, I would have explained all the reasons that leaving is nuts. Again, we're torn.
Regardless, "convince yourself", because it's being used above as a compound adjective, needs a dash. (I'm not sure about "full on".) So I'm not sure why I should take anything you have to say seriously.
236.last: OTOH, drive 1.5 hours from the new place and where are you? Harrisburg.
242: eh, someone here might have something interesting to say. Or not, in which case it's no big deal. In the end, it's mostly my wife's call, and she doesn't read unfogged. If she can envision a happy life there, we're likely to go. If not, we'll stay. I'd much rather be happy at home and insecure or miserable at work than vice versa. Now, of course, we'll move and she'll run away with the milkman in Central PA, because the milk there is supposed to be fracking delicious.
The flagship/non-flagship thing makes a lot of sense.
As I head towards possibly moving back to CA the cost thing worries me, but I just can't see staying where I am, especially since I don't have an indefinite length job here and nearly all my family is in CA. Also I have no kids and don't spend much time thinking about a future where I have them, though I don't rule out the possibility of being one of those dads too old to run around with the kids all day.
My parents made the Bay Area to Midwest move in the early 70s. My mother has hated it for 40 years. All she wants in life is to go home, where there is no winter and summer isn't scorchingly hot and humid. As it turns out, my father prefers it. He actually likes seasons. When I was little, I commented on how pretty a huge field of tall, green corn was. Her answer? "Only a child who's grown up here would think corn is pretty."
You'd get to brag about what a big endowment you have if you move.
You will, however, have to arm your children with witty retorts to the coastal elite who think your children, by virtue of having grown up in Flyover Country, are barely literate rubes who are probably engaged to their first toothless cousins.
244: yup. But I'm not sure, once we're already talking about driving 1.5 hours with the kids, that it's really that big a difference to drive 3.5 hours and arrive at their grandparents' house or Washington, DC, or NYC (where we have tons of friends), or Philadelphia (where, again, we have tons of friends). Or 4.5 hours, in which case we'd arrive at my best friend's house on the beach or my wife's best friend's house upstate or our favorite cousins' house in Toronto. Actually, no, it's 5.5 hours to Toronto. Still, you get the point: once you're packing up the car and driving far away, the relative differences shrink in size. There are all kinds of economies of scale of chlld-rearing.
Not a flagship campus? Does the Alfalfa industry mean NOTHING to you?
I dunno, I'm a CA native who spent a lot of time back East and moved back. It seems like there's generally an itch from transplants to move back someplace "simpler" with "real" seasons etc etc. Of such people I've known who actually try to move back, maybe 50% then realize that the East or Midwest sux it and they dont like the new-old place and come back for the sunshine, maybe 50% stay and are happier. For me, winter is horrible and I can't believe they didnt stop the child rape university seems particularly isolated. OTOH I have a fantasy of a large affordable house easy schooling and generally more simple lifestyle that recently left me fantasizing about moving to the Detroit suburbs. So, in conclusion,
Can you major in Alfalfa or do you just major in Fodder with a focus on alfalfa?
Also, as my probably literally a fascist gym coach likes to say, milk is for babies, not men.
243.2: You started that sentence with "[r]egardless" because you knew that I in my ignorance of the niceties of the English language would have probably have used "irregardless" and you have thus subtly reminded me of my rightful place in the world of discourse.
Actually, I was not necessarily using "convince-yourself" mode to mean you are doing it all in one direction; I would find myself trying out strongly entrenched positions on either side as the day of decision approached.
Milk with fracking additives doesn't sound good, but I'm sure I'll change my mind after the energy industry starts an ad campaign for Clean Milk.
247: You'd get to brag about what a big endowment you have if you move.
Actually, like most state schools, not that big of an endowment given the size of the school. $1.7B which in PA puts less than a third of Penn's and behind Pitt.
236 "Daddy, why is there no forest here?"
But you have a very pleasant arboretum right there on campus.
And State College HS usually has a pretty good soccer team! (At least compared to anyone for many, many miles around, but then in the state playoffs they'll usually lose to one of the Philly, Harrisburg-Lancaster or Pittsburgh-area powerhouses.
Some non-state schools with massive endowments also run huge structural deficits.
Interestingly, another version of my "nice, comfortable, pretty interesting, not too expensive place to raise kids" fantasy has me moving to Sacramento/Davis, so maybe the frontier for pleasantville just retreats ever eastward.
And what if you ever find yourself desperately needing to talk to a competent physicist to answer some burning question you have? In Davis there are some really wonderful ones. At the other place there are a bunch of crackpots who would horribly mislead you.
But I'm not sure, once we're already talking about driving 1.5 hours with the kids, that it's really that big a difference to drive 3.5 hours
Really?
I'm pretty sure I've told this story here before but three weeks after completing our move into our old, drafty house* in January and I had been a few weeks in my job in a barely-profitable industry versus a wildly-profitable one and my wife had settled into her non-paying job status I opined while were going to sleep one night that we had just made the biggest mistake of our lives. A tension-reducing moment as my wife replied that she had been thinking the exact same thing so it freed it us to wallow in our stupidity together.
*Two days after we moved I proved that if you pay someone enough money you can induce them to come to your house and dig a new gas line in the middle of a snowstorm.
In the end, it's mostly my wife's call, and she doesn't read unfogged.
Make your wife listen to this episode of "This American Life" and then let her come to her own conclusions.
the Bay Area to Midwest move
Again, we don't live in the Bay Area. We live in the Central Valley. For all intents and purposes, this is the Midwest (without winter, yes), though it's more proximate to the Bay Area than most of the region.
"nice, comfortable, pretty interesting, not too expensive place to raise kids"
Davis is all of these things. It's an absolutely great place to raise kids, which is one of the reasons that, despite the absurdity of the offer I've received, we're very torn.
259 casts our decision in an entirely new light.
That said, the physicists here, despite by all accounts being very good, are treated like absolute shit by the upper administration (see also: the historians, literature professors, etc.). After all, they aren't engineers or economists or biological scientists or agronomists or something that actually matters.
266: Is that actually any different in Dysthymic Valley? It wasn't when I was there but, again, 20 years ago etc.
maybe the frontier for pleasantville just retreats ever eastward.
Go east, prematurely old man.
I have a fantasy of a large affordable house easy schooling and generally more simple lifestyle
There was a time I couldn't imagine living anywhere but CA but living up here has taught me different. As it turns out affordable housing and a great outdoor scene is awesome. I loves me some fly fishing, hiking, and national parks and I wouldn't want to go to corn country but I'd totally live somewhere like State College.
259: Would this be pointing at the rather grandly named Institute [for Big Stuff]?
267: it's different, but not in ways we can understand. No, really, the history department is treated very well, and being a historian of the Civil War era there is a very big deal. As I may have mentioned upthread -- I can't be bothered to check -- the last two people who have held this chair have shaped the field. I'm not as good as those guys, at least not yet and probably not ever, but I might want to give being important in my field a try. I really don't know.
We just got a letter from the (formerly very) successful local artisanal butcher. Due to the drought, he's selling off his herd. If you need me, you can find me where moisture falls from the sky.
"Middle of the American Middle" could work as a blog name.
263: I'm shorthanding a bit. My mother spent her childhood in the valley (Marysville, I think, with frequent visits to her grandparents in Santa Cruz), met my father in high school in Pittsburg, then both went to Berkeley. So, their move was Bay Area to Midwest, but she'd rather live anywhere milder than where she is now. I'm amazed at the amount of vitriol she's retained for forty years over leaving "home" where she lived for twenty-five. At any rate, it wasn't really meant to be advice about not moving, more advice about not living somewhere you hate for forty years and about divergent responses to moving halfway across the country.
254: Fine, fine. I meant more in a laydeez sense.
We just signed up for our local artisanal butcher's meat club. This is a thing for which I am excited indeed. Especially since we now have room for a walkable-density-destroying grill, that I intend to use very soon indeed now that the weather is above 20.
275: yeah, we're quite fearful of living somewhere we don't want to live and of spending the next however many years looking wistfully westward. On the other hand, I grew up in the Midwest (mostly), and my wife is from the same racist hellscape as Sifu Tweety. So we're not really Californians, though we sometimes tell ourselves that we are.
273 was really meant to destroy Halford's fantasy about moving to Davis.
I just wanted to type "indeed" a few times.
If you do move you should live in the part of town with less people shitting on your lawn.
And 356 was meant to lead him to double down on his contempt for anyone making the move.
Halford's controlling the blog comments with his mind!
279: you mean fewer people, right? Regardless, yeah, we'll probably look for a place in the less shitty part of town.
If houses cost so much in California, why doesn't everybody make their own out of cob? Like the hippies in Oregon.
281: Right, not near the adjuncts.
283: I don't even see contingent laborers. And they don't see me, as I make them avert their gaze when I enter a room.
If you do move you should live in the part of town with less people shitting on your lawn.
So Bellefonte then?
Out of all the transient academics, it is the visiting assistant professors who are most dangerous.
I heard that of you sprinkle the lawn with the urine of a dean, it will scare away visiting faculty.
Postdocs may be the ones to watch out for. Not yet pushed outside the system, they still cling to the small glimmer of hope that animates a revolutionary class.
Bellefonte has beautiful housing stock (houses that sell for...zero dollars). But the schools suck.
I wonder where I even do wish I lived! I think raising kids in SB proper is probably kind of weird on account of wealth and whitness, plus could I possibly afford to house us long-term in comfort downtown (which is where I'd want to live for walkability reasons)? If someone waved a wand and gave me a job and house in Berkeley, would the Berkeleyness eventually make me insane? If someone merely waved the wand to give me a job there, where would we live? Pittsburgh is great but I would still whine about winter. Et cetera.
Davis's climate is not as nice as the Bay Area. It is hot as hell in the summer.
They are nowhere near as good at fundraising as UCLA. UCLA imported a Harvard person to be chancellor at one point (Carnesdale) so that they could fundraise. Berkeley seems to be administratively (i.e., in terms of paying their bills) less competent than UCLA. I don't know how they are at fundraising. I think that UCLA could make it as a private school.
Learned recently that Kim Stanley Robinson lives in Davis. Is that well-known?
262's last segment (A Drinking School With A Football Problem) talks about football, alumnae, and booze. Despite Spannier's denials (and then later, contradictory, statement) I think it did play a role in what tactics the school could use in reducing extreme drinking.
I think that UCLA could make it as a private school.
The UCs are basically private schools as it is. Just like UW-Madison, Michigan, Penn State, Virginia, etc. Last I checked (a few months back), we're apparently hovering around 10% funding from the state.
292: here? Yes. I mean, among literate people, of which you are not one.
294: Right, but I meant really flourish. Davis's tuition at the law school is much higher than that of private schools which are better ranked. Even 10 years ago, it was $10K, a relative deal. At private school prices, it's not--especially since there's no endowment to speak of.
University of Michigan seemed like a very private sort of school, culturally, in a way that Davis wasn't.
If someone merely waved the wand to give me a job there, where would we live?
In the flats!
295: Come see the contempt inherent in the academic system!
296: I think the law school here is in pretty serious trouble, actually. It's one of many things that gives me pause about the future of this place. I mean, this place will exist in the future, but it's hard to know in what form.
Stupid steel house sold before the stupid open house so now I can't look at it.
300: A steel house was on our short list when we moved here. Post WW-II boring ranch otherwise, although on a nice piece of land. (Ultimately bought by developers, torn down and two new big houses put up there.)
I've been to the Taco Bell in Bellefonte. If it would be helpful for me to share my experience with you, I'm willing to do that, Wafer.
Isn't the law school at the potential new place also in somewhat of a problematic spot?
303: They seem to be slowly getting that fixed it seems. Just need to kill a few holdouts who want to keep the weird-ass Carlisle presencethe weird-ass Carlisle presence
I stopped at a Sheetz in Carlisle last year. I heard country music, but nothing about a law school.
Out of all the transient academics, it is the visiting assistant professors who are most dangerous.
So say the neighbors of this extended-stay hotel in Evanston. (Or am I just making the reference to a previous link explicit?)
306:
This always happens atm: somebody posts a story intersecting your life with extraordinary specificity.
I've very often parked in front of that building, w/o architectural significance, because my mother lived in the building across Davis; she had the view the residents are afraid will be compromised.
Maybe Apostropher remembers the day a local weekly paper had a picture of the weird phallic pillars on a local branch library, and he put out a call for the picture (only in the paper not online version), which had just landed on my doorstep. That library has since been demolished.
306: for once, reading the comments pays off. Thomas Bayes's comment is fun.
If it would be helpful for me to share my experience with you, I'm willing to do that, Wafer.
I'll be in touch!
307: I know what you mean. I regularly worry that I already know all of you independently and just don't realize it.
308: Ha!
