Get rid of this on Google!!!

Hey, all -- this site: triple-double U martinlutherking dot org is a link to a white pride (Stormfront) version of Martin Luther King's life and works. Please link to this Martin Luther King site instead. Thanks for the help!

Too Little Time, Too Much To Do

Hence the lack of blogging. I can't do it from work (inappropriate use of state equipment), and I have no time at home. At least not until I turn in my book review and write a couple of lectures and get ready for my observation ...
I suppose that's another way to keep from becoming too depressed about Iraq. Oh -- but I have to say one thing about it. I don't look at the pictures. I won't, if I can help it. I will not be looking for the decapitation footage. I think that that's just not good for the soul.

Life is not an Essay Exam

But sometimes we act as if it were. There are a ton of smart bloggers out there. Lots of them are smart academic bloggers. Some of them blog exclusively on academic life, others blog on broader topics. Those who write about life in the academy approach it from different angles -- many from within, many more from the marginal existence of contingent faculty life, and more than a few having left academe behind. In fact, the latter has taken up Rana is one of the most recent to go. Like the Invisible Adjunct, Rana was unable to find tenure-track employment in her field. More surprising is Erin O’Connor’s departure – at least from the standpoint that she was a tenured faculty member. What isn’t surprising is that, as a critic of the many things wrong with the way colleges and universities are run, she decided to opt out.

Among those who haven’t left are the folks at Cliopatra, a group of scholars that actually includes someone I’ve known for all of 17 years, and the folks at Crooked Timber, many of whom I wish I knew. I read most of these people’s blogs fairly religiously, and comment frequently. I admire their writing skills and use the fact that they blog to excuse my own attempts, always hoping that no one thinks I’m a complete idiot. I also tell myself that reading good writing and writing more myself will help to keep me on track. I’m contingent faculty, you see. My community is therefore limited to the institution of the moment (or, in this happy case, the academic year on a pro rata contract). So I blog and read blogs.

Lately, however, I’ve found myself reading and commenting far too much. I have work I should be doing, yet I am drawn to my peers’ comments on the world around us. I have a review due next week. I have midterms to correct. I have a garden, dammit! I also have two new preps and, since a class was cancelled, an online course to develop by June. Oh – and a grant proposal, and two committees that actually require work. So what the hell am I doing? I want a TT job. I have the opportunity to move in that direction and pad my CV. Can blogging be bad for academics? Am I addicted?

And then it hit me. No. Most of us will have had conversations with colleagues over the last three years – and especially since talk began about invading Iraq – about reasons for low enrollments, students having trouble focusing, students missing class and being treated for depression. I’ve never had a problem believing the folks who claimed that much of it was due to the additional stress of our wartime world. I just never really thought about how it affected me.

These last couple of weeks have been especially awful. We all know it. Stories like this (don’t look if you are trying to avoid pictures) pushed me into a big ol’ morass of navel contemplation. So my blog reading has gone way up. No more just the mutual support of the “life in academia” blogs. Nope – it’s all Iraq and Bush, all the time. It seems to me that I’m not the only one to be doing this, either. Comments and trackbacks bloom in colorful and maddening profusion. Why this upswing? And then it hit me: because you’re an academic geek, doofus. Our students may just stop coping, but we have coping mechanisms. We have learned to argue our points with evidence! We know how to do research! We are used to taking information that might seem to be unrelated and make sense of it! We can do it! We have the technology! If we just do our homework, we can make sense out of this mess! So we read what the people we’ve come to trust and ‘know’ say about the subject, hoping to add to our own knowledge and perhaps validate our own conclusions. We add to the discussion. And finally, we realize that we’re using our training to cope in the only way we can, by trying to make reason out of the unreasonable. Or at least that’s my story.

One of the great things about being a trained historian is learning to recognize biases. I’d like to think it also helps us recognize when we’re spinning our wheels. I have recognized my coping mechanism, and I understand it. Now I can get back to work.

Link to US Treasury press release
(for those who went to the WA caucus the other day)

Why I worry about June 30 or, a lesson not yet learned

We're supposedly handing over sovereignty. Sovereignty means the new Iraqi government can then demand the US leave, and we would have to do that. Or is there some other kind of sovereignty? We haven't left Afghanistan yet. It's a multi-national force there, but one that seems underfunded and that is propping up a government without any real power against the same old warlords.

Six months ago, after being bullied by her in-laws, his daughter, Mallali Nurzi, 26, soaked herself in petrol and struck a match. Alerted by her screams, Mallali's young daughter discovered her mother writhing in flames. By the time the fire was extinguished, Mallali was burned all over. It took her 24 hours to die. In a suicide note to her parents, she explained why she had chosen such a horrific end. "Her husband's family were treating her like an animal," said Mr Shah [her uncle], tears trickling down his cheeks. [... ]
A government mission sent to investigate the problem in Herat, the biggest city in the country's west, reported that at least 52 young, married, or soon-to-be married women had burned themselves to death in the city in recent months. The youngest was a 13-year-old bride-to-be.

If a tragedy like the increase of self-immolation among young women can go on under occupation in a place where we supposedly were victors, can it bode well for Iraq?

Oh my. It's even worse. As I went to look up the link for the above story, I saw this:

Three young girls in eastern Afghanistan were in critical condition in hospital last night after being poisoned, apparently by militants as punishment for attending school.

Is this what the restoration of freedom looks like? Bastards. June 30th. Think about it.

Link to US Treasury press release

Is this why I pay my taxes?

I wasn't actually going to blog about this. I wanted to explore a bit more on Henry Farrell's bit on Academic Calvinism. Fortunately, it's been followed up several times, perhaps best by Naomi Chana at Baraita. I have to say, she's one of the people who makes one believe in an academic Elect, she's so damned good. Still, it is a conversation we have fairly frequently at our institution. The odd thing there is that most tenured faculty consider their positions to be a combination of merit, timing, and sheer dumb luck. Most of them spent time in the part-time trenches before they got their TT jobs and have seen a lot of good people go unrewarded. Oddly enough, the adjuncts have a different attitude. Many seem to think that merit shouldn't come into question at all, when faced with inside candidates who should be entitled purely for having taught developmental English scut-work classes for the last 10 years. That's what I was going to blog about today.

Instead, I'm blogging about something else. My politics may be showing a bit, but I hope that even some of my more conservative readers will agree that at least part of my objections are valid. I pay taxes. I accept that a lot of the taxes I pay go to things I really don't believe in, like egregious amounts of corporate welfare and Rick Santorum and Tom DeLay (I have nothing against the fact that they are duly elected representatives, mind -- Clearly they represent the view of the majority of their constituents. I'm just glad they don't represent me). I do think that there are lines that shouldn't be crossed, however, and the last paragraph of this press release crosses one of them. This is, as far as I can tell, a real press release from the Department of Treasury Office of Public Affairs. The last paragraph reads as follows:

America has a choice: It can continue to grow the economy and create new jobs as the President's policies are doing; or it can raise taxes on American families and small businesses, hurting economic recovery and future job creation.

Last time I looked, the President's (any president) political campaigning was supposed to be kept separate from the day-to-day workings of government. Moreover, I don't really think that the Treasury Department should be campaigning for the incumbent. It's not on.

In a related note, this story also irks me. The story tells of a systematic redaction of information that is contrary to the Bush administrations political and moral agenda. I don't know that the Bush administration is the first to do this, but then I haven't always blogged, either, so my comments would have been invisible at any rate. The National Council for Research on Women does have a Feminist agenda (disclaimer to those who would like to think I haven't considered the source. I suppose one might even debate Linda Basch's statement that

Taken cumulatively, this has an enormously negative effect on women and girls.

Even I wouldn't say that, although I certainly agree that an absence of information is detrimental. More importantly, I think that actions like this:

The National Cancer Institute's Web site was changed in 2002 to say studies linking abortion and breast cancer were inconsistent; after an outcry from scientists, the institute later amended that to say abortion is not associated with increased breast cancer risk.

and this:

Its report cited a fact sheet from the Centers of Disease Control that focused on the advantages of using condoms to prevent sexually transmitted disease; it was revised in December 2002 to say evidence on condoms' effectiveness in curbing these diseases was inconclusive.

and even this:

At the Labor Department's Women's Bureau Web site, the report said 25 key publications on subjects ranging from pay equity to child care to issues relating to black and Latina women and women business owners had been deleted with no explanation.

are together examples of plain immoral and unethical behavior. We have a right to have full information when making medical decisions. Our taxes pay in large part for the kinds of studies and reports mentioned, and we have a right to see what we paid for. Morality can't be founded in ignorance. And choices can't be moral if they are made out of fear.

too cool for school

:: how jedi are you? ::

We happy few

Via Rana, who followed up on a post by wolfangel, there's some discussion on several of the recent First Person columns in the Chronicle. First, to the happy zoologists, best of luck. Apparently, this duo found jobs in the same general field their first year out and at the same institution! Woohoo!

But seriously. it's nice they found jobs, but I have to agree with most of the comments. They were extraordinarily lucky, and it's hugely annoying that they seem not to realize just how exceptional their circumstances are.

We received a wide range of e-mail responses to our first two essays about our job search. Some readers were encouraging, but the truth is, most were condescending and caustic. Some readers, put off by our optimism, seemed almost eager to see us fail. Such metaphorical face-slapping was eerily reminiscent of our experience applying jointly to graduate schools, when we were told by certain faculty members that our chances of both getting accepted to a doctoral program in the same department were slim to none.
To all of those skeptics, we say: Call us lucky. Call us charmed. Call us assistant professors.

This from a person who claimed:

The only bleak moment came when I was informed that other candidates were being interviewed for the position I had applied for. My spirits were crushed, but only briefly.

Perhaps the fact that people were caustic, condescending, and metaphorically slapping them in the faces was because most of us actually realize that competition is tough. Generally very tough. It turns out that ABD wife was happy to take any of several positions for which she was qualified. How often does that happen? Don't get me wrong -- if this couple are happy, then I'm ecstatic for them. My irritation isn't out of misplaced envy -- I'm always happy to hear that someone got a job, unless they're completely useless. I correspond regularly with colleagues against whom I have competed and may compete again in future -- we congratulate and commiserate with each other as appropriate. What gets me is that these folks are so seemingly clueless about the entire process, and are nevertheless so damned smug. Meanwhile, the Invisible Adjunct has left the profession.

Speaking of adjuncts, my own point of outrage in the last Chronicle comes from the latest Jill Carroll column. It's not that her advice on joining unions is wrong per se, it's just that it's not right.

Why am I not certain? Because I would have to assess whether a union would hurt my situation. Possible employer retaliation is always a concern when dealing with unionization. The labor movement in this country is replete with stories of employers who simply opt to hire nonunion employees when they feel their arms twisted by unions. While a university probably wouldn't or couldn't just immediately fire all of its unionized adjuncts, it might eventually phase them out and replace them with nonunion adjuncts.

Well, duh. That's always the argument against organized labor, though. I work on a union campus, which has its own special atmosphere. All one union, yet the adjuncts treat the full-timers as enemies. Still, when I mentioned a strike once, everybody else said, "Oh, no -- we can't do that, it's against the law." The reality is, if you aren't under contract, you aren't on strike. Adjuncts could make a point (at least here) by refusing to sign contracts. The adjuncts wouldn't be fired -- but there would probably be plenty of people to take their places, unless the union were at least state-wide. Isn't it funny that grad students who are TAs can strike, yet MA and PhD adjuncts can't?

At any rate, Carroll walks a fine line between defending the rights and reputations of adjuncts and their qualifications and bending over for the institutional Man, promoting the idea that adjuncts can be happy and productive with their lot, if they just shift their expectations or work a bit harder. Adjuncts should be happy that they have metaphorical shoes, because there are a lot of PhDs who go around barefoot. While it's a good thing that she's carved out a niche that she's comfortable with, it cannot justify a system that is so patently unjust and which, in the long run, really will damage higher education as a whole. What Carroll's attitude demonstrates most clearly is that a large number of academics are no better off than Wal-Mart workers when it comes to job security fear as a motivating factor. What is sadder to me is that the Wal-Mart workers seem more able to make their own circumstances known, while we academics, with all of our skills, generally bury our heads in the sand.

Life interrupts blogging

Well, I should have been working on my book review this weekend, but it was sunny and warm, and the veggies needed transplanting. So, I planted a bunch of heirloom tomatoes and three kinds of basil, carrots, and radishes. Cukes go in tomorrow from seeds, and broccoli starts from the spouse's greenhouse. Then it's all about turf/sod. Lots of rolls of it to be removed from the yard. Thank goodness the days are long, because here's what else I need to do:

• Prep this week's classes (showing Le Retour de Martin Guerre makes that a bit easier)
  
• Write a midterm for the survey
  
• Aargh! correct paper proposals!
  
• Begin work on online Ancient course,due end of quarter
  
• Write a book review for an online journal
  
• write a grant application
  
• start outlining an article
  
• write many thank you notes to friends and colleagues
  
• blog
  
• keep up with the garden.

Why am I telling you this? Simple -- I'm not feeling academic bloggy, but hope that putting my "to do" list out in public will make me get it all done. More academic stuff later -- John Holbo has made it more of an imperative -- I think.

Oh -- last note for the day. saw this on Friday night -- loved most of it. Saw this last night -- apologies to all my friends who warned me. What a waste of part of my life. Forget red and blue pills -- this one begs for a cyanide capsule or serious alcohol.

What's the point of all those diplomas ...

...If the damned students are going to argue with you at every step? I have two killers this quarter. Pleasant, but young men with attitude, I do believe. I think they might have more respect if I were a male person like them. As it is, they just argue. And argue. And split hairs that I tell them don't exist. Ugh.

Eszter at Crooked Timber has a fun post here -- I got over 45% on the nerd quiz. I'd already seen the Chernobyl photos -- hauntingly beautiful.

That's me blogging for today. I'm far too annoyed to blog about anything else today. It was a typical Monday.

The 'F' word strikes again, or the lumpers strike
back

The economist next door and I got into it this morning because he used the f word. I replied that it wasn't an economic system, and that there was a very good argument for it not being a system at all. I said that if he wanted to talk about manorialism, that was pretty much economic, but that the feudal thing was an arrangement (or series of arrangements) between members of a warrior nobility. As it went on, I realized we were in the middle of a classic lumper-splitter argument. He claimed to be looking for similarities, while I will always look for the exceptions -- and with feudalism, it's all exceptions. He brought up an author I'd never heard of, and about whom the economist knew nothing, I brought up Duby, Ganshof, and Brown, all strangers to the economist, and we had to agree to disagree. I dunno -- I just am not very good at making those big, overarching statements without documentation. That, and I like to know that I'm comparing apples to apples in terms of using words like "class." Oddly enough, the conversation came out of my trying to justify extra credit for attending a free dinner to learn more about world poverty, sponsored by some of my colleagues. His justification went something like, "but isn't there poverty and hunger and war in the stuff you cover?" Of course there is ... I just don't know that it's a productive use of class time to discuss even the very real similarities between the devastation wrought by the 30 Years' War and that wrought by war and drought in the Horn of Africa. That just seems to me more of a PoliSci or Econ or even Philosophy kind of discussion.


It's also the kind of thing that drives David Horowitz crazy. I don't supposed he'd really be pleased to have anecdotal advice that disagrees with his theory on liberals in the classroom. I'm the most liberal (pretty much the only liberal) among my grad school cohort. Most of them are employed, and none of them hide their conservatism. Another colleague who just got a TT job is also pretty damned conservative, but I won't say who it is till he mentions it on his blog. Moreover, I think the man's insane if he thinks students won't use political discrimination as a new way to work the system. They already do. Students frequently use essay exams and papers to rant (coherently, if one is fortunate) about issues barely related to the assignment. If they receive a low grade (in my class, any essay that has no thesis and/or does not address the question is going to get a pretty low grade), they assume it's because I didn't like their views. Me, I think that an essay purported to be on the effects of the World Wars on women's and minority civil rights and socioeconomic status should not be five pages of how women's rights are bad for society, though it's ok that black people get to vote now. I got that paper once. Really. As for the report of the student who wrote on "Why Saddam Hussein is a War Criminal" rather than "Why George Bush is a War Criminal," I have to say that, if the assignment really exists (I can't find any citations that don't go back to Mr. Horowitz or Students for Academic Freedom), it sounds ill-judged. That said, it's for a criminal justice class -- if the idea of the assignment were to compare the actions of the Bush White House with the standards of international law or with the actions of other people accused of war crimes by those same standards, it seems perfectly vaild. The student's paper doesn't fulfill the assignment. Perhaps he should have addressed the assigned question but included all the examples he could find that prove George Bush is not a war criminal. If he'd done that, his argument for political discrimination might hold some water. It's good to compare apples to apples.

It's hard to spring forward when you lose an hour of sleep!

It's division meeting day, I'm sleepy, and very behind. Somehow I need to re-read all of The Debate on the English Reformation by Wednesday, finish an online course proposal, and write a lecture for tomorrow morning's class. Hence the lack of blogging of note.

Medieval Academy: days 2 and 3 or, I am a scholar, too

Or am I? Am I a scholar if I think like one, talk like one, but don't produce like one? It's a good question, I think. Medieval Academy answered it for me. A funny thing about contingent work is that it makes it very easy to marginalize oneself. By this I mean specifically that, not having a "real job", one begins to believe oneself to be less deserving, less capable, less than those colleagues who have made it. It is the most insidious part of contingent work, I think. In my case, I hold on to the knowledge that I am a really good teacher and a good colleague. I have external validation for this, which helps, and it's been good in that I know I want a job where teaching is the primary focus. It even allows me the luxury of knowing I'd be perfectly happy at a community college, because I truly believe in their mission and find the relationships at that level really rewarding. When I look around at other contingent faculty (in person and in the blogosphere), however, I realize that we are all quite capable of taking the long-term negative point of view, the one that somehow makes teaching the All. Taken a step further, contingent faculty can easily find themselves in a downward spiral of resentment that only worsens when teaching experience doesn't quite make up for not having kept up with the field, and the all-too-rare new line is filled by someone who hasn't been teaching as long, but has delivered papers, etc.

What has this to do with Medieval Academy? Well, first, I got to say thank you to Constance Bouchard. This is an amazing woman. One of the things the American Historical Association has been addressing more and more lately is the problem of contingent faculty. Professor Bouchard recently wrote addressing the problem from a pretty unique perspective -- she adjuncted for fourteen years before getting a tenure-track job. During that time, she produced some very well-respected work. I didn't get a chance to ask if she had a supportive spouse or independent wealth, which can and often do play a role in adjunct productivity, but in many ways, it didn't matter. Right in front of me was an example of a woman who hadn't given up.

Also, I ran into people I'd met at other conferences. These people acted as if I were one of them, as did most of the people I met, despite my "local community college" title on my badge. I asked questions, some not as coherently formulated as I would have liked, and they were addressed -- in fact, sometimes people came up afterwards and told me the questions were good. One nice grad student actually hunted me down a day after I asked him a couple of questions and said that they had helped him to clarify part of what he was working on. Finally, I had a very nice conversation with a reasonably well-known personage who spoke to me as a colleague and to some extent as a mentor (pretty damned cool on 36 hours' acquaintance) on teaching approaches, materials, and why the hell wasn't I putting some of my ideas on paper. All I can say is that the conference was like having someone take a shovel to my thick head. I really do love the scholarship. and any exile I feel is self-imposed. So I'm going back to basics. Even if I haven't got the time to read more that 20 pages a day, or write more than a couple of paragraphs here or there, they add up. No more, "I can't have it both ways." I can. I am too a scholar -- if somewhat snail-like in pace.

As far as the conference itself went, I thought the teaching Medieval Islam panel disappointing. Only one of the panelists took a practical approach. The others were all crusades people, and gave very interesting points of view, but took up a good bit of time with them, so that the actual discussion was limited to a few questions. The lack of time really meant that there was almost no sharing of pedagogical approaches, useful sources, etc. I think, though, that it did lead to some interesting and useful private conversations over the course of the weekend.

The panel on feuds was really good -- really brought some good questions to mind on the nature of feud and how closely it is tied to kin-groups: can there be feuds within kin-groups? what is the line between war and feud? What is the line between civil war, war, and feud? I also enjoyed the Carolingian panel -- the only one. The 8th and 9th centuries get short shrift these days, as what used to be the Early Middle Ages becomes more and more subsumed into the more-recently-defined Late Antique. Now it seems that the Merovingianists are Late Antique, but the Middle Ages seem to start in a lot of people's minds with the 10th c. At any rate, it was an interesting panel, although really more on texts and scholarship than I normally like. Still, it also gave me some good ideas. There were a couple of other panels I went to that were good, but frankly, I was pretty sleepy. I'm sure many readers know how it is -- meal, sit in stuffy room, often darkened; break with coffee in small cups, sit in stuffy room; meal, not enough time to get fresh air, sit in stuffy room; coffee, sit in stuffy room; alcohol, sit up talking too late; early meal, sit in stuffy room ...for three days.

Still, it was a good conference, as far as I can tell. On the down side, no one has cleaned my house in days, and only I can prep this week's classes, so I'm off.

Medieval Academy, Day 1

Finished posting my Blackboard stuff, put a book on reserve, and ran down to the conference. The first person I saw was someone who was on my committee. I wasn't sure he'd remembered me after all these years, but he did. He's a Fellow, though, so I got the distinct feeling I was a lesser person. Went to some interesting papers, including Heidi Marx-Wolff's really interesting study of madness and possession (and saintly cures thereof) in 14th c. Italy. Also a really cool paper in the same panel by Cynthia Ho on the representations of the life of St Francis in Orta. The third paper was iffy, at best, I thought. Just not too well organized or presented, although there were some interesting points. Part of a dissertation in progress, though, so it was understandable.

The reception at the end of the evening was fun. Met some very nice folks, and even managed to get kinda spoken down to by one of the respected dinosaurs known for his acerbic nature (or so I gathered). A good time was had by all. Now I'm off to learn about teaching Medieval Islam in a post 9/11 world.

Teaching and Arsenal

What do they have to do with one another? I really like them both. I got the dread evaluations (last quarter's) back yesterday. The worst class average was a 4.34 on a scale of 1 to 5. I am beaming quietly. One actually had a comment that said I should get tenure! Chance would be a fine thing -- I don't even have a TT job! Still, it's nice to be liked. Truth be told (ah, the clichés are flowing today), I was very lucky. I had classes full of people who were bright, likeable, and willing to participate, even when they didn't always do the work. It's easy to teach people who want to learn, and it's very hard not to benefit from all that positive energy. This quarter seems to be going the same way -- I have students who are working ahead on our discussion boards, and someone commented today that I put things into context really well. Imagine! even better -- this is not and April Fool's joke.

So, I'm off for a day or two, but hope to blog a bit about the conference. The toughest part is that I will have to record the big game. this is not good. Not quite as bad as my sister scheduling her wedding for the same weekend as the World Cup Semi-Finals, but almost. Not sure why we should be that concerned, though. Edu's doing well, and there's a very solid midfield without Gilberto. Cole is a loss, but frankly, I'd just as soon he didn't play against United, since they bring out the thug in him more than most. Besides, Clichy seems to be doing rather well. As for Cygan, I admit Wenger might have made a good buy, but he's not really up to the quality of the rest of the team. Still, if Campbell's groin injury flares up, things could go pear-shaped.

Shoot -- If there weren't going to be a morning panel on teaching medieval Islam, I'd stay home and watch the game.

Changing Colors

Also known as procrastinating badly. Or skiving off. This is what happens the first week of classes when one class dies from under-enrollment. No FTEs for me! Of course, the bloody thing was listed incorrectly in the course catalog -- as a 9-hour per week plus online component for a paltry 5 credits. Probably shouldn't be blogging from school, either; I'm chalking it up to a professional development rant.

Anyway, I've changed the colors to something I hope is less offensive (the spouse thought the old color scheme was icky), and am now going to write a dread lecture for tomorrow's Early Modern class. Actually, I do need to hop it -- I'll be at the Medieval Academy Annual Meeting, which is in Seattle this year -- otherwise, I'd be out of it, having spent all my travel funds for the year.

As a brief note, though, as I promised on the Invisible Adjunct site, I'll be blogging more now, and about more substantial stuff. Hell, maybe I'll even come out of the anonymity closet, although I'm not sure about that while I'm on the market. At any rate, you can expect to hear about the Medieval Academy. If you'll be there, look me up!

These are a few of my favorite rants

Lots of things going on, and no time to blog. That's my life these days. How do other academics do it? Blog, grade, teach, keep up in your field, write lectures/craft discussions, do new preps, do service, write that bloody book review (oops! thank goodness I have two more months), clean the house, walk the dog, keep the garden from overflowing, and look for permanent work -- not necessarily in that order? Which leads me to the question of why non-academics think academics have it so good.

I am not complaining about the amount of work per se, just so you know. David Lester might still call me a major whiner, but then he seems to be particularly non-service oriented. But really, I do work harder at this than any other job I've ever done -- at least during term. And there's a lot more stress -- there's this overwhelming guilt if you feel you aren't giving good teaching. I wouldn't change it for the world (unless I have to go back to adjuncting for too long, and then it will be a difficult decision based mostly on finances), but it's very time consuming.

Still, I am now deliberately taking time to comment on a few things I think are important -- in no particular order:

• The firing of commentator Sandra Tsing Loh -- which I think was plain outrageous. This response by the NPR Ombusdman helps mellow my intense irritation with NPR, but not much. I know it wasn't within their purview to keep it from happening, but it was pretty darned wishy-washy of them to not speak out loudly against it.
  
• Most of the comment section and in fact the initial editorial by Ruben Navarette, most of which seem to be more of the Gen X same. Excuse me, but if the boomers are supposed to be the "Me Generation," how do we catalog the Gen X-ers? I know a lot of really nice Gen X-ers, BTW, who really aren't disaffected, apathetic, selfish, and full of opinions that are based on faulty half-baked conclusions, but then, there are those who really are the rule. Maybe it's vengeance against the boomers? I dunno -- I think I may have to get back to this one, because the more I think about it, the more annoed I get. It wouldn't be so bad, but I'm about to grade a bunch of papers, many of which are written by X-ers who I know have started with the conclusion and looked for evidence to back it up, instead of looking at what the evidence says.
  
• And speaking of argumentation and evidence, I'm still very concerneed with the entire Bush political apparatus. And the way they work. You know, that repetition of semi-truths in hopes that the rest of us will forget the question? Condy Rice is an expert. Never met a question she couldn't sidestep. But she does it well in her little mock Chanel suits and her throwback to Jackie Kennedy hair. Give the woman a pillbox hat, somebody.
  
• People acting as if it has to be either Martha Stewart or Ken Lay. Or Halliburton, for that matter. Put them all in jail.
  
• Outsourcing. Not going there in depth at the moment, but for the record, I think that, if people want to shop at Walmart and get Walmart prices, they need to accept that jobs will be done abroad by cheaper labor. Ditto for high-tech services. You want to have an American job and earn decent wages? Look for the union label, people. That said, I bet we could hire a lot more people in American companies -- or at least not renege on proised benefits-- if the top execs didn't make as much as 400 times what the worker bees make.

I'll be back on some of those later. Perhaps I'll even be attacked for my horrible ultra-liberal, aging hippie beliefs. Please note: Aging ever, hippie never.

Do not read if you are squeamish! What I did on my weekend that wasn't academic was this. Took the cat to the vet, that is. They did the messy part, but had to put the cat under.

Oh -- I also went to the state caucus. Now I'm a delegate for the next round. Go figure.

Interesting conversation going on over at Invisible Adjunct. It started out as an ethical discussion, but has turned into a bit of a brouhaha.

Speaking of ethical discussions, I now have to worry about this. Washington state taxes are just about the most regressive in the nation -- the bottom 20% income bracket pays approximately 17.6% of their income in taxes while the top 20% pays an average of 6.5%. Now the "Education Governor", aka "the only Republican ever invited to give the Democrats' response to the State of the Union Address," has us over a barrel. We might get some more money, but only if we stick it to the poor. Oh -- and of course, there's nothing in the measure to convert adjunct positions to tenure-track ones. 'Cause in Washington State, we care more about price than value.

My very late thoughts on the the AHA anuual meeting:

People were right. The meat market set-up tends to create a group of job-sekers who exude fear, paranoia, jealousy, and hatred. That said, one of the nicest people I met was interviewing for the same job, and I was glad to have met him. Oddly enough, we actually were vaguely acquainted through the blogosphere anyway.

The other thing is that there aren't nearly enough minorities in History -- I popped my head by the minority historians reception, and it was not very crowded. At the panels I attended, the only person of color I saw was my friend Annette, who gave a great paper on hostage brides. Lots of female medievalists, not many other minorities represented.

Also, conferences are good. Especially for those of us in the world of the two-year institution. Although there is definitely a kind of academic hierarchy (everybody is supposed to want to be at a Research I school and/or Ivy, although most of us get jobs that demand more teaching than research), my ego is such that I have no problems arguing points with my senior colleagues, and I enjoy the buzz I get when people find out I'm "just" a CC person. on a sadder note, I went to the CC reception, and was dismayed to find that there were colleagues who felt the need to have their PhD status listed on their badges. It's kind of like admitting that CC faculty have to prove themselves to the "real" professors. Such nonsense.