We're off on vacation in a day or so... until then, I have a huge list of things that need to get done, so I'm busy, but then I'm looking forward to doing next to nothing for a week!
We've decided that each member of the family is responsible for researching and finding one activity to do on one of the days. So far, we've got an interesting mix of activities - can't wait to see what the last one looks like!
Catch ya later!
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
Casting about
This week I sent off a chapter to my dissertation advisor, and a different one to my other committee members. So that feels good. And I've officially finished all the edits that I've gotten feedback for this summer.
But now I'm starting another chapter, and I'm casting about for a way to get into it. If you've ever seen a fly fisherman fish (or done so yourself), you know what I mean. In fly fishing, it's important to get the fly to land just right, so that it looks realistic as it sits atop the water. The more it looks like a real fly, the more likely you are to be successful in catching a fish.
What this means is that the fly fisherman will cast multiple times, until the placement looks right. The cast is always upstream so that the fly can float with the current, looking just like an insect that has landed on the water. Then the fly fisher waits, watching how the fly moves along with the flow of the water. If it doesn't look realistic, a re-cast is in order. If it looks good, the fisher lets the fly continue downstream till the line is taut and then recasts upstream again, casting until the placement looks right.
For me, starting a new chapter is a lot like fly fishing. I cast about for a way in, first trying this source, then that, contemplating if I should start with a re-read of the theory, a close reading of the primary source(s), a summary of the themes, or another chapter-specific method. What this means is that I tend to jump about a lot. I read a chapter here, another there, review some notes, jot some ideas down, and generally progress rather haphazardly. It's not that I don't know what I want to say or do in the chapter, I just don't know what I need to do to get me started.
When this happened each time I started to write the first few chapters, I got quite concerned. I figured that if I didn't know where to begin, I had no business trying to write a dissertation. Even now, I'm struggling with accepting that this is the way that I find my way into the chapter. I berate myself by comparing myself to all those (possibly imaginary) dissertators out there who sit down with a clear plan of attack for their chapter and start writing, pouring out wisdom every time they sit down at the keyboard.
I'm sure there are dissertators out there who don't need to cast about like I do. They probably finish their dissertations in a year or two, rather than the 3+ that it's taken me to write this thing (so far). But I'm not one of them. I flounder when I begin a new chapter, trying to figure out what will help me get started.
I'm not despairing. After all, I've discovered that this seems to be the way I need to work to get started writing. I tell myself it is not a colossal waste of time if it results in a successful defense at the end. But I sure am jealous of those people who don't cast about time after time before finally getting a bite worth working for!
But now I'm starting another chapter, and I'm casting about for a way to get into it. If you've ever seen a fly fisherman fish (or done so yourself), you know what I mean. In fly fishing, it's important to get the fly to land just right, so that it looks realistic as it sits atop the water. The more it looks like a real fly, the more likely you are to be successful in catching a fish.
What this means is that the fly fisherman will cast multiple times, until the placement looks right. The cast is always upstream so that the fly can float with the current, looking just like an insect that has landed on the water. Then the fly fisher waits, watching how the fly moves along with the flow of the water. If it doesn't look realistic, a re-cast is in order. If it looks good, the fisher lets the fly continue downstream till the line is taut and then recasts upstream again, casting until the placement looks right.
For me, starting a new chapter is a lot like fly fishing. I cast about for a way in, first trying this source, then that, contemplating if I should start with a re-read of the theory, a close reading of the primary source(s), a summary of the themes, or another chapter-specific method. What this means is that I tend to jump about a lot. I read a chapter here, another there, review some notes, jot some ideas down, and generally progress rather haphazardly. It's not that I don't know what I want to say or do in the chapter, I just don't know what I need to do to get me started.
When this happened each time I started to write the first few chapters, I got quite concerned. I figured that if I didn't know where to begin, I had no business trying to write a dissertation. Even now, I'm struggling with accepting that this is the way that I find my way into the chapter. I berate myself by comparing myself to all those (possibly imaginary) dissertators out there who sit down with a clear plan of attack for their chapter and start writing, pouring out wisdom every time they sit down at the keyboard.
I'm sure there are dissertators out there who don't need to cast about like I do. They probably finish their dissertations in a year or two, rather than the 3+ that it's taken me to write this thing (so far). But I'm not one of them. I flounder when I begin a new chapter, trying to figure out what will help me get started.
I'm not despairing. After all, I've discovered that this seems to be the way I need to work to get started writing. I tell myself it is not a colossal waste of time if it results in a successful defense at the end. But I sure am jealous of those people who don't cast about time after time before finally getting a bite worth working for!
Monday, August 18, 2008
Grateful
My neighbor's house burnt down last night.
Right down.
I've been lucky in life so far to not be so close to a house fire. I've been near grass fires, and even helped fight one (I was pretty young, so I don't know I did much good, but I did whatever I was told to do). But this house went up fast. The flames were shooting up 30 m above the housetop within minutes and the fire had spread to the second house before the fire trucks even got here, and they were pretty quick.
We're three houses down from the original house and two from the one that the fire spread to, but when you look out my kitchen window, you realize how close the second house it to ours. If the next house had caught, ours would've gone because we're very close on that side to our neighbors house. But it didn't. They did have some water damage through an open window, and they say their house smells of smoke like ours does - we all had our windows open; it was 30 degrees yesterday - but the damage is minimal for them, and everyone is safe. I didn't talk to the other neighbors who were involved, but the policeman we spoke to said they were fine and had called family etc.
One of the boys in the original house was slightly burned and his father had a bad gush on his arm that we helped wrap up till he could get over to the paramedics, but no one was seriously hurt. Considering how fast that house went up, that could easily have not been the case.
We were in the middle of a thunderstorm when the fire broke out, (but the rain stopped just after that unfortunately!) Since there'd been a crash of thunder that seemed very close just before the fire broke out, I assumed the house had been hit by lightning. But the paper said two teens were messing around in the garage with matches and gasoline. That would explain why I saw the 13 year old being led away in tears by a policeman.
Because we were so close, we were evacuated from the house while the fire crews worked the fire.
I had always wondered why police showed up at a fire. Fire crews and paramedics I could understand, but I never really understood why the police showed up until yesterday. They come to manage people. They were the ones who told us to get out, and they went through our house to make sure everyone was out. (We figured that out when we returned and bedroom doors that hadn't been open earlier were standing open. Good thing we followed fire protocols and left the door unlocked so they could get in to check without breaking in.)
The police also commandeered a city bus for us to sit in while we waited, got water and food for evacuees if they needed it, and kept the crowds of onlookers back. And there were crowds! We of course evacuated out the front door, and we stood about ten houses away, behind the police cordon watching for a long time. When it looked like they had the fire under control in the front, we went around the back to see what the damage was like there.
It looked a carnival or something going on.
There's a major thoroughfare running behind our house and we back onto a large parkland area (yes, it's very nice). The place was covered in people. Covered. It looked like they were all there for a festival or something. There were people sitting on the hill watching, standing on the bike path, on the boulevard, across the street, and up the road. There were people everywhere. There were also cars everywhere. The entire boulevard was covered in cars that people had parked on the grass, stopping to watch, but even though some of them had pulled over, two full lanes of traffic going one way was at a standstill. As we watched, police had to come and clear all the vehicles out of the way and then cordon off the road to allow additional rescue vehicles through.
Three hours later, with the sun down and not much to see, I could still just make out groups of people sitting on that hill watching, I don't know what, since there wasn't much left to see.
Even this morning, the place is busy with onlookers, not just the fire crews finishing up their cleanup and inspection. And even though all the news crews were out last night - hubby was interviewed and made the evening news - they are all here again this morning. It's quite the show. I understand human curiosity, but it was still surprising to see how many people spent their entire evening watching someone else's tragedy unfold. I'm just glad it was only property that was damaged. That can be fixed. People can't.
Right down.
I've been lucky in life so far to not be so close to a house fire. I've been near grass fires, and even helped fight one (I was pretty young, so I don't know I did much good, but I did whatever I was told to do). But this house went up fast. The flames were shooting up 30 m above the housetop within minutes and the fire had spread to the second house before the fire trucks even got here, and they were pretty quick.
We're three houses down from the original house and two from the one that the fire spread to, but when you look out my kitchen window, you realize how close the second house it to ours. If the next house had caught, ours would've gone because we're very close on that side to our neighbors house. But it didn't. They did have some water damage through an open window, and they say their house smells of smoke like ours does - we all had our windows open; it was 30 degrees yesterday - but the damage is minimal for them, and everyone is safe. I didn't talk to the other neighbors who were involved, but the policeman we spoke to said they were fine and had called family etc.
One of the boys in the original house was slightly burned and his father had a bad gush on his arm that we helped wrap up till he could get over to the paramedics, but no one was seriously hurt. Considering how fast that house went up, that could easily have not been the case.
We were in the middle of a thunderstorm when the fire broke out, (but the rain stopped just after that unfortunately!) Since there'd been a crash of thunder that seemed very close just before the fire broke out, I assumed the house had been hit by lightning. But the paper said two teens were messing around in the garage with matches and gasoline. That would explain why I saw the 13 year old being led away in tears by a policeman.
Because we were so close, we were evacuated from the house while the fire crews worked the fire.
I had always wondered why police showed up at a fire. Fire crews and paramedics I could understand, but I never really understood why the police showed up until yesterday. They come to manage people. They were the ones who told us to get out, and they went through our house to make sure everyone was out. (We figured that out when we returned and bedroom doors that hadn't been open earlier were standing open. Good thing we followed fire protocols and left the door unlocked so they could get in to check without breaking in.)The police also commandeered a city bus for us to sit in while we waited, got water and food for evacuees if they needed it, and kept the crowds of onlookers back. And there were crowds! We of course evacuated out the front door, and we stood about ten houses away, behind the police cordon watching for a long time. When it looked like they had the fire under control in the front, we went around the back to see what the damage was like there.
It looked a carnival or something going on.
There's a major thoroughfare running behind our house and we back onto a large parkland area (yes, it's very nice). The place was covered in people. Covered. It looked like they were all there for a festival or something. There were people sitting on the hill watching, standing on the bike path, on the boulevard, across the street, and up the road. There were people everywhere. There were also cars everywhere. The entire boulevard was covered in cars that people had parked on the grass, stopping to watch, but even though some of them had pulled over, two full lanes of traffic going one way was at a standstill. As we watched, police had to come and clear all the vehicles out of the way and then cordon off the road to allow additional rescue vehicles through.
Three hours later, with the sun down and not much to see, I could still just make out groups of people sitting on that hill watching, I don't know what, since there wasn't much left to see.
Even this morning, the place is busy with onlookers, not just the fire crews finishing up their cleanup and inspection. And even though all the news crews were out last night - hubby was interviewed and made the evening news - they are all here again this morning. It's quite the show. I understand human curiosity, but it was still surprising to see how many people spent their entire evening watching someone else's tragedy unfold. I'm just glad it was only property that was damaged. That can be fixed. People can't.
Saturday, August 16, 2008
Job market search
Yesterday I made a binder of all the stuff I've been collecting about conducting an academic job search. There's a lot of information provided both by my department and out there on the web, but all of it says the same thing, and none of it answers the magic question "Will I find an academic job I like this year?"
I guess I'll only know the answer to that question by the time next year's hiring season rolls around, at which point, I'll either be moving, or preparing to do the whole thing all over again.
The more official sources talk about how the "big" list starts coming out September 15th with dossiers due in October and interviews (if you get them) at the conference in December. But the more I read, the more I realize there's a lot of hiring that goes on outside that schedule. For instance, on the Canadian academic sites, there are already a couple of listings that fit my qualifications.
But before I get to the point where I'm ready to start sending out materials, there's a lot to be done. I'd been forewarned by my lovely friend who went through this process a couple of times already, so I've started some of it, but there's still much to be done.
The dossier requires a c.v., which is up-to-date except for those two articles I edited this summer which I'll need to see if I can find a publishing ETA for. So that's pretty much done. It also requires a teaching summary of student evaluations and a teaching philosophy. My advisor likes the teaching philosophy I wrote, so that's pretty much good to go, and I just need to enter the last of the student evals. Then I just need to write cover letters for each position as I find them.
The bigger problems are the writing sample, and the letters of recommendation. Two of my committee members are willing to write letters and said so when I met with them last month. The third committee member has much less confidence in me, probably because we haven't worked together as much, and so I worry about what that letter will look like.
You see, I know that I have a very good chance of finishing on time, but because of the backlog of chapters I now have I don't know that they're convinced that I will be. And they need to indicate in their letters that they have confidence I will be finished by the time a job would start next September. So that might be a tricky negotiation.
The other concern is the writing sample. If they like your application enough to consider you for an interview, the first thing they will ask for is a writing sample. This should be about 20 pages and from the dissertation, which means I will need to do some serious editing of a selected chapter to get it to 20 pages since most of my chapters so far are in the 40-60 page range. It also has to be indicative of the kind of scholarship I'm doing, and so far, most of my writing has been in the chapters that set-up, or provide an alternate approach to the core of the dissertation's argument. Yes, for the purpose of the writing sample, this was not a good plan of action, but for the purpose of the dissertation, I think it was the perfect way to tackle the material. So if I get to the point of needing a writing sample, I'll have to do some serious scrambling. But no sense crossing that bridge till I come to it.
So I'm sitting here with a binder full of information that I'm going to hopefully fill with wonderful job opportunities that I will then apply for. I'm both nervous and excited... but mostly nervous...
I guess I'll only know the answer to that question by the time next year's hiring season rolls around, at which point, I'll either be moving, or preparing to do the whole thing all over again.
The more official sources talk about how the "big" list starts coming out September 15th with dossiers due in October and interviews (if you get them) at the conference in December. But the more I read, the more I realize there's a lot of hiring that goes on outside that schedule. For instance, on the Canadian academic sites, there are already a couple of listings that fit my qualifications.
But before I get to the point where I'm ready to start sending out materials, there's a lot to be done. I'd been forewarned by my lovely friend who went through this process a couple of times already, so I've started some of it, but there's still much to be done.
The dossier requires a c.v., which is up-to-date except for those two articles I edited this summer which I'll need to see if I can find a publishing ETA for. So that's pretty much done. It also requires a teaching summary of student evaluations and a teaching philosophy. My advisor likes the teaching philosophy I wrote, so that's pretty much good to go, and I just need to enter the last of the student evals. Then I just need to write cover letters for each position as I find them.
The bigger problems are the writing sample, and the letters of recommendation. Two of my committee members are willing to write letters and said so when I met with them last month. The third committee member has much less confidence in me, probably because we haven't worked together as much, and so I worry about what that letter will look like.
You see, I know that I have a very good chance of finishing on time, but because of the backlog of chapters I now have I don't know that they're convinced that I will be. And they need to indicate in their letters that they have confidence I will be finished by the time a job would start next September. So that might be a tricky negotiation.
The other concern is the writing sample. If they like your application enough to consider you for an interview, the first thing they will ask for is a writing sample. This should be about 20 pages and from the dissertation, which means I will need to do some serious editing of a selected chapter to get it to 20 pages since most of my chapters so far are in the 40-60 page range. It also has to be indicative of the kind of scholarship I'm doing, and so far, most of my writing has been in the chapters that set-up, or provide an alternate approach to the core of the dissertation's argument. Yes, for the purpose of the writing sample, this was not a good plan of action, but for the purpose of the dissertation, I think it was the perfect way to tackle the material. So if I get to the point of needing a writing sample, I'll have to do some serious scrambling. But no sense crossing that bridge till I come to it.
So I'm sitting here with a binder full of information that I'm going to hopefully fill with wonderful job opportunities that I will then apply for. I'm both nervous and excited... but mostly nervous...
Friday, August 15, 2008
Murata Boy, the Robot that can Ride Bicycles
So you thought it was cool when robots could walk? How about bike riding?
Wednesday, August 13, 2008
RBOC: Post-overwork edition
I have no energy for blogging coherent thoughts, so you get bullets today.
- I have just completed a HUGE content conversion job for an elearning client. It was exhausting because the content was boring and the project seemed to go on forever. But it is done. I am awaiting feedback from the client before I can proceed to the next stage. Part of me wants a response right away so I can finish it off; part of me really, really needs a break from the material!
- Shakespeare in the Park this year was unusual. We saw The Tempest last night, which had some Western touches that I think really nicely encompass the constantly shifting identity of this city. The show was sponsored by the local NHL team, yes, hockey sponsoring the arts - unusual, no? The storm in the production was provided visually and aurally by Aboriginal drummers/singers and dancers. This choice did a good job of conveying the chaos of the storm, but not the thunderous destruction of it. So it was an interesting interpretive choice. Shakespeare + Aboriginal music + hockey. Where else could you get such a combination?
- This has been the summer of editing. 2 articles and 3 chapters. It's not quite over, but I can finally see the end of it, which is a relief. I have not spent so much time just revising things at any point! I cannot wait to get back to reading and writing again!
- I had my first pedicure ever last weekend, thanks to oldest daughter's treat. Yes, I realize most women by the time they've reached my age have had at least one pedicure. But I never had. So it felt very decadent, and my toes look absolutely gorgeous now! Much better than when I do them myself. I'll have to do this again sometime...!
- We leave for family vacation in ten days and we'll be gone for another ten. I have not been on such a long vacation since hubby and I met. I do not count the two week trip to England because I spent at least a week of it in seminars and/or libraries (cool libraries, yes, but they were still libraries). And I had assignments I had to complete. So I don't count that one. We're renting a cabin on the coast and right now, we have no plans aside from the time we will arrive and the time we will leave. Awesome!
- Middle and youngest daughters leave tomorrow to visit grandparents, cousins et. al. I'd love to be going with them, but if I'm going to avoid working through the first extended family vacation we've had in ages, I will need to work like a fiend while they are gone. I'll have to find a way to get there this fall if possible.
Saturday, August 09, 2008
Beauty sometimes requires work to find it
It happens too often when you're undertaking something as large as a dissertation that to other people it sounds like it's nothing but trouble.
But that's not true.
There are times when it is beautiful.
There are times when you can see through the thick clouds out across the darkness to find something that satisfies your desire for a well turned phrase.
Like when you know there's a problem with part of a chapter and you know it needs to change but you have no idea how to do it. So you mess around with the paragraph(s), rewriting, tweaking, but all the while knowing that it isn't what you want. Hell, it isn't even good. And you get frustrated, yes, and that's usually the time when you hear it on a facebook update or in this blog.
But then, oh, then, you come across something. Maybe it's an idea that comes to you while you're washing dishes or running errands. Or you're flipping through notes or books you've read. And you get an idea. And that idea almost stops your breath because it seems just so ideal. And you fear that when you work it out, it won't be as perfect as it seems in that moment. But it's the idea that's going to fix that problem you have. Whether it fixes it beautifully, or just plain fixes it doesn't matter. The fact is, you've hit upon a solution for that problem paragraph that's been bugging you for days (maybe weeks!).
And it turns out to be exactly what you were looking for.
That's a thing of beauty.
Wednesday, August 06, 2008
Hindsight
Q: Is there a size limitation on the notion of a 'win-win' situation?
I've been thinking about decision making a lot lately. Part of it is because the content development I'm doing in my elearning job has a module about decision making. Another part of it comes out of that sense of displacement I felt returning to PhD city. A friend there commented that it seemed like I'd never left, which put things in perspective for me, making me realize that the weirdness that I felt was all in my head - for the people still there, it was not weird for me to be around.
What that comment also did was make me consider what how my life might look different had I stayed in PhD city instead of retreating to home-land for the dissertation writing phase of the degree.
That's when I came to the conclusion that the notion of WIN-WIN situation rarely seems to apply to the really big decisions. Little ones, like deciding on a hamburger pizza* when one person wants pizza and the other burgers for dinner are easy. Big ones... well, I just don't know.
If I had stayed, I would have regular contact with my advisor, other committee members, and other graduate students. I have no doubt that this regular contact would have been stimulating and perhaps provided me with answers/solutions to problems that I have to muddle through myself without that kind of community around.
Had I stayed, I would've continued teaching the same classes I had been, which would mean no new preps along with becoming more streamlined in my approach to those classes. This would've meant less time teaching the same amount. But it also would mean that I wouldn't have gotten to teach public speaking, or psychology, or teach at a very different institution than the one I was at in PhD city.
If I had stayed, I also would not have gotten a job like the elearning job I have, where I have learnt all kinds of new skills, and had some really interesting experiences creating the content for the programs we've put together. Then again, teaching and doing my online work take up a good deal of time during the week, so perhaps I would've made faster progress had I stayed.
We wouldn't have been able to buy a house if we'd stayed though, and it is really, really nice not to be renting anymore. So that's a plus on the moving side. But counter that with the added expense of flying across the border to attend conferences etc. (all of which are on the south side of the 49th). I had factored in the cost of flying back to PhD city as an added expense, and our higher income here and strengthening dollar have meant that the expense is manageable. But what I didn't count on is that instead of it costing me, say $300 to fly from one place to another within the U.S., it now costs me $500 or more to get across the border to these same conferences.
There are more things on both sides of the coin, and I suppose one can never know what life would've been like on the other side of things. So I'll never know what was the best decision. For my family, I think coming back was the best for them. For me, I don't know. That's why I wonder if there's such a thing as a WIN-WIN situation for such big decisions.
*If you have never had a hamburger pizza, you are missing out on one of the strangest and yet surprisingly delicious foods on the face of the earth. Yes, the first time I looked at a pizza with pickles on top, I thought the people who made it were insane. But, boy are they good!
I've been thinking about decision making a lot lately. Part of it is because the content development I'm doing in my elearning job has a module about decision making. Another part of it comes out of that sense of displacement I felt returning to PhD city. A friend there commented that it seemed like I'd never left, which put things in perspective for me, making me realize that the weirdness that I felt was all in my head - for the people still there, it was not weird for me to be around.
What that comment also did was make me consider what how my life might look different had I stayed in PhD city instead of retreating to home-land for the dissertation writing phase of the degree.
That's when I came to the conclusion that the notion of WIN-WIN situation rarely seems to apply to the really big decisions. Little ones, like deciding on a hamburger pizza* when one person wants pizza and the other burgers for dinner are easy. Big ones... well, I just don't know.
If I had stayed, I would have regular contact with my advisor, other committee members, and other graduate students. I have no doubt that this regular contact would have been stimulating and perhaps provided me with answers/solutions to problems that I have to muddle through myself without that kind of community around.
Had I stayed, I would've continued teaching the same classes I had been, which would mean no new preps along with becoming more streamlined in my approach to those classes. This would've meant less time teaching the same amount. But it also would mean that I wouldn't have gotten to teach public speaking, or psychology, or teach at a very different institution than the one I was at in PhD city.
If I had stayed, I also would not have gotten a job like the elearning job I have, where I have learnt all kinds of new skills, and had some really interesting experiences creating the content for the programs we've put together. Then again, teaching and doing my online work take up a good deal of time during the week, so perhaps I would've made faster progress had I stayed.
We wouldn't have been able to buy a house if we'd stayed though, and it is really, really nice not to be renting anymore. So that's a plus on the moving side. But counter that with the added expense of flying across the border to attend conferences etc. (all of which are on the south side of the 49th). I had factored in the cost of flying back to PhD city as an added expense, and our higher income here and strengthening dollar have meant that the expense is manageable. But what I didn't count on is that instead of it costing me, say $300 to fly from one place to another within the U.S., it now costs me $500 or more to get across the border to these same conferences.
There are more things on both sides of the coin, and I suppose one can never know what life would've been like on the other side of things. So I'll never know what was the best decision. For my family, I think coming back was the best for them. For me, I don't know. That's why I wonder if there's such a thing as a WIN-WIN situation for such big decisions.
*If you have never had a hamburger pizza, you are missing out on one of the strangest and yet surprisingly delicious foods on the face of the earth. Yes, the first time I looked at a pizza with pickles on top, I thought the people who made it were insane. But, boy are they good!
Friday, August 01, 2008
The difference a year can make
Remember when you were a kid, or even a teenager, and a year seemed like forever?
When you get older, it seems like the years blend into each other, which means that you don't realize how time is passing. Sometimes this means you try to do things you could 10 years ago and realize you no longer can. Sometimes it means that you look at nieces or nephews you haven't seen in a few years and try to match the image in your head with the stranger in front of you.
But a year can make a big difference.
Just a few days ago, I was in a minor panic because I had convinced myself I had not idea how to write a dissertation. All that feedback I got last month had caused me to worry that I didn't know what I was doing.
But today, I realized that although I might not know what I need to do, I'm getting closer.
I sat down today to take on the next task on my list - edit the very first chapter I wrote... over a year ago. After it was reviewed last year, I made some notes, but decided I needed to write the two chapters that precede it before editing. Now that I've finished those two chapters, I'm returning.
I still am not sure that I know what a dissertation should look like. But I do know it doesn't look what I wrote a year ago. A year ago, I was still writing what really boils down to a really, really long seminar paper. And I know now that kind of writing just won't do.
So maybe I have figured out something over the last year.
It might not be much in the grand scheme of life, but that year has made a big difference in how I see my work now. I suppose now is the time to end with some platitude about old dogs and new tricks...
When you get older, it seems like the years blend into each other, which means that you don't realize how time is passing. Sometimes this means you try to do things you could 10 years ago and realize you no longer can. Sometimes it means that you look at nieces or nephews you haven't seen in a few years and try to match the image in your head with the stranger in front of you.
But a year can make a big difference.
Just a few days ago, I was in a minor panic because I had convinced myself I had not idea how to write a dissertation. All that feedback I got last month had caused me to worry that I didn't know what I was doing.
But today, I realized that although I might not know what I need to do, I'm getting closer.
I sat down today to take on the next task on my list - edit the very first chapter I wrote... over a year ago. After it was reviewed last year, I made some notes, but decided I needed to write the two chapters that precede it before editing. Now that I've finished those two chapters, I'm returning.
I still am not sure that I know what a dissertation should look like. But I do know it doesn't look what I wrote a year ago. A year ago, I was still writing what really boils down to a really, really long seminar paper. And I know now that kind of writing just won't do.
So maybe I have figured out something over the last year.
It might not be much in the grand scheme of life, but that year has made a big difference in how I see my work now. I suppose now is the time to end with some platitude about old dogs and new tricks...
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Job insecurity
More rosy news on the job front. Maclean's is suggesting that the retirement surge by Boomers predicted to start around now will flatten out because of the economic downturn since Boomer's retirement funds will have shrunk and they'll stay on longer to compensate.I suppose I could get all worried about this. But it seems to me that every few months someone is saying that the job market is not going to get any better. It really doesn't even feel like news anymore.
So what's a girl to to?
Onward and upward, I say. There's not much point in quitting now, is there? The only thing this does is make me pay a bit more attention to my back-up plan(s).
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Science fiction can make for better humans?
According to this article in the Globe and Mail, reading makes you a more empathetic human.
Researchers found that subjects who read fiction scored higher on empathy social reasoning tests. The reasoning is that fiction is a way for understanding the world.
But as the authors note, the research did not distinguish between different kinds of fiction.
As a science fiction lover, I've got to wonder about the stereotypical "socially inept" sf/fantasy reader. This reader of fantastical fiction often is pictured as someone incapable of carrying on a conversation about anything but the books he/she reads, will argue minutiae and details of their favorite series, and generally seems to exhibit a reluctance to move out of routine and comfortable circles. This stereotype isn't misplaced. I have met people like this. I've also met people like this who only watch a specific genre of movie (sf, fantasy and/or horror usually) or only play a certain type of video game.
So why the stereotype, and does reading sf make you a more socially apt person as much as other genres of fiction might?
I would suggest that readers of science fiction who balance their lives and reading, and who read other genres in addition to science fiction could become more empathetic than readers of other genres. Yes, I realize I fall into that category, so in some ways I'm defending my own love of science fiction by proposing that a little science fiction is good for you. But I think the argument makes sense. Tell me what you think.
If as the researchers suggest, fiction teaches you about life and how to interact with real life people by reading about imaginary ones, then it stands to reason that the biggest social benefits of reading come from reading about characters that are unlike people who you've actually met before. In real life, you've already figured out how to deal with the people you've met. So the social benefit of reading is to encounter characters who are unlike those you've met in real life so that if/when you meet people like those characters in the future, you will already have an idea how they think and how you might respond to them. It makes sense that the social lessons learned through reading are ones that are uniquely different from the lessons learned in real life.
So science fiction (and fantasy) would produce the most empathy because they offer worlds and characters that you presumably would not meet in real life. But at this point it becomes necessary to consider the way that science fiction worlds are created.
In science fiction (and fantasy), the author usually begins with a premise that doesn't exist in real life, for example, that we have humanoid robots, or that humans have developed ESP, or that we can travel through space. Based on this premise, the story unfolds in a way that accounts for this factor that differs from our reality. This means that many things might change. For example, if humans evolved to develop ESP, the nature of espionage, secrets, and social interaction would be different.
What doesn't change much in science fiction is the people. As the saying goes, "people are people wherever you go" and this applies to science fiction as much as it does to life. The characters in science fiction, the ones that we hear the story through are people first and foremost. They may be different from us, but their responses are recognizable as the kinds of responses people might make, even if those people are sentient robots, aliens, or humans just trying to make sense of a world in which space travel is a possibility.
This is the consistent factor in science fiction. No matter how different the world in which the story takes place might be from our world, the responses of the people in the story seem right and appropriate to the situation.
If fiction does indeed provide us with models for approaching people and situations that we've never encountered before, then it stands to reason that the more fantastical the people and situations, the better prepared one might be to meet with future unknown people and situations. In that case, reading science fiction just might make you a better human.
Researchers found that subjects who read fiction scored higher on empathy social reasoning tests. The reasoning is that fiction is a way for understanding the world.
"Fiction is really about how to get around in the social world, which is not as easy as one might think," said Keith Oatley, one of the researchers and a professor in the department of human development and applied psychology at the University of Toronto. "People who read fiction give themselves quite a bit of practice in understanding that. And also, I think reading fiction sort of prompts one to think about these questions - you know, what are these people up to?"Makes a certain amount of sense. Read fiction, witness what characters do in different situations. Apply similar responses to situations that emerge in life.
But as the authors note, the research did not distinguish between different kinds of fiction.
As a science fiction lover, I've got to wonder about the stereotypical "socially inept" sf/fantasy reader. This reader of fantastical fiction often is pictured as someone incapable of carrying on a conversation about anything but the books he/she reads, will argue minutiae and details of their favorite series, and generally seems to exhibit a reluctance to move out of routine and comfortable circles. This stereotype isn't misplaced. I have met people like this. I've also met people like this who only watch a specific genre of movie (sf, fantasy and/or horror usually) or only play a certain type of video game.
So why the stereotype, and does reading sf make you a more socially apt person as much as other genres of fiction might?
I would suggest that readers of science fiction who balance their lives and reading, and who read other genres in addition to science fiction could become more empathetic than readers of other genres. Yes, I realize I fall into that category, so in some ways I'm defending my own love of science fiction by proposing that a little science fiction is good for you. But I think the argument makes sense. Tell me what you think.
If as the researchers suggest, fiction teaches you about life and how to interact with real life people by reading about imaginary ones, then it stands to reason that the biggest social benefits of reading come from reading about characters that are unlike people who you've actually met before. In real life, you've already figured out how to deal with the people you've met. So the social benefit of reading is to encounter characters who are unlike those you've met in real life so that if/when you meet people like those characters in the future, you will already have an idea how they think and how you might respond to them. It makes sense that the social lessons learned through reading are ones that are uniquely different from the lessons learned in real life.
So science fiction (and fantasy) would produce the most empathy because they offer worlds and characters that you presumably would not meet in real life. But at this point it becomes necessary to consider the way that science fiction worlds are created.
In science fiction (and fantasy), the author usually begins with a premise that doesn't exist in real life, for example, that we have humanoid robots, or that humans have developed ESP, or that we can travel through space. Based on this premise, the story unfolds in a way that accounts for this factor that differs from our reality. This means that many things might change. For example, if humans evolved to develop ESP, the nature of espionage, secrets, and social interaction would be different.
What doesn't change much in science fiction is the people. As the saying goes, "people are people wherever you go" and this applies to science fiction as much as it does to life. The characters in science fiction, the ones that we hear the story through are people first and foremost. They may be different from us, but their responses are recognizable as the kinds of responses people might make, even if those people are sentient robots, aliens, or humans just trying to make sense of a world in which space travel is a possibility.
This is the consistent factor in science fiction. No matter how different the world in which the story takes place might be from our world, the responses of the people in the story seem right and appropriate to the situation.
If fiction does indeed provide us with models for approaching people and situations that we've never encountered before, then it stands to reason that the more fantastical the people and situations, the better prepared one might be to meet with future unknown people and situations. In that case, reading science fiction just might make you a better human.
Saturday, July 19, 2008
Realistic dreaming
Strangely, for the last three nights, I've had fairly realistic dreams that I remember upon awakening. Three nights ago it was a dream about friends. Two nights ago, the family. Last night, I dreamt the introduction to my dissertation defense. It was pretty realistic. The room. The people there. I dreamt the beginning, then sorta skippped over the part where I read from some of my work (since my introduction clearly indicated I was reading from a chapter I have yet to write, my brain decided to skip that part), then entertained questions. The inevitable question that had little to do with my work but led back to the speaker was there, as was a discussion that digressed from the topic.
What's strange is not that I remember the dreams, nor that they were realistic because this happens to me all the time. In fact, sometimes my dreams are so mundanely realistic - like grocery shopping - that I'm surprised upon wakening to discover that I didn't actually do what I'd dreamt. What's strange is that these kinds of dreams have come three days in a row. Don't think that's ever happened before, so I gotta wonder why.
What's strange is not that I remember the dreams, nor that they were realistic because this happens to me all the time. In fact, sometimes my dreams are so mundanely realistic - like grocery shopping - that I'm surprised upon wakening to discover that I didn't actually do what I'd dreamt. What's strange is that these kinds of dreams have come three days in a row. Don't think that's ever happened before, so I gotta wonder why.
Thursday, July 17, 2008
New Classics List
Lists.
Most of the people I know make lists. Some of them obsessively. Some just make them in their heads. But the attraction of the list seems to supercede gender or occupation or income level.
So what is it about lists that fascinates us?
I ran across a list that caught my attention. Yes, it's a literature list. But this one strikes me as different from many of the lists I've encountered before. I wanted to blog about this list. Of course I've found that Michael Berube has already written about popular culture and lists, and of course he says must smarter things than I can about pop culture and lists, but since his essay is eight years old, I'm gonna take a swing at talking about this latest list anyway. Perhaps there's something more to add to a contemplation of list making.
There's something very unusual about Entertainment Weekly's "New Classics" book list (by new classics they mean books published between 1983 and 2008). What struck me was that there are some things on the list that I wouldn't normally think of as classics.
1. The Road , Cormac McCarthy (2006)
2. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, J.K. Rowling (2000)
3. Beloved, Toni Morrison (1987)
4. The Liars' Club, Mary Karr (1995)
5. American Pastoral, Philip Roth (1997)
6. Mystic River, Dennis Lehane (2001)
7. Maus, Art Spiegelman (1986/1991)
8. Selected Stories, Alice Munro (1996)
9. Cold Mountain, Charles Frazier (1997)
10. The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle, Haruki Murakami (1997)
11. Into Thin Air, Jon Krakauer (1997)
12. Blindness, José Saramago (1998)
13. Watchmen, Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons (1986-87)
14. Black Water, Joyce Carol Oates (1992)
15. A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius, Dave Eggers (2000)
16. The Handmaid's Tale, Margaret Atwood (1986)
17. Love in the Time of Cholera, Gabriel GarcÃa Márquez (1988)
18. Rabbit at Rest, John Updike (1990)
19. On Beauty, Zadie Smith (2005)
20. Bridget Jones's Diary, Helen Fielding (1998)
21. On Writing, Stephen King (2000)
22. The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao, Junot DÃaz (2007)
23. The Ghost Road, Pat Barker (1996)
24. Lonesome Dove, Larry McMurtry (1985)
25. The Joy Luck Club, Amy Tan (1989)
26. Neuromancer, William Gibson (1984)
27. Possession, A.S. Byatt (1990)
28. Naked, David Sedaris (1997)
29. Bel Canto, Anne Patchett (2001)
30. Case Histories, Kate Atkinson (2004)
31. The Things They Carried, Tim O'Brien (1990)
32. Parting the Waters, Taylor Branch (1988)
33. The Year of Magical Thinking, Joan Didion (2005)
34. The Lovely Bones, Alice Sebold (2002)
35. The Line of Beauty, Alan Hollinghurst (2004)
36. Angela's Ashes, Frank McCourt (1996)
37. Persepolis, Marjane Satrapi (2003)
38. Birds of America, Lorrie Moore (1998)
39. Interpreter of Maladies, Jhumpa Lahiri (2000)
40. His Dark Materials, Philip Pullman (1995-2000)
41. The House on Mango Street, Sandra Cisneros (1984)
42. LaBrava, Elmore Leonard (1983)
43. Borrowed Time, Paul Monette (1988)
44. Praying for Sheetrock, Melissa Fay Greene (1991)
45. Eva Luna, Isabel Allende (1988)
46. Sandman, Neil Gaiman (1988-1996)
47. World's Fair, E.L. Doctorow (1985)
48. The Poisonwood Bible, Barbara Kingsolver (1998)
49. Clockers, Richard Price (1992)
50. The Corrections, Jonathan Franzen (2001)
51. The Journalist and the Murderer, Janet Malcom (1990)
52. Waiting to Exhale, Terry McMillan (1992)
53. The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay, Michael Chabon (2000)
54. Jimmy Corrigan, Chris Ware (2000)
55. The Glass Castle, Jeannette Walls (2006)
56. The Night Manager, John le Carré (1993)
57. The Bonfire of the Vanities, Tom Wolfe (1987)
58. Drop City, TC Boyle (2003)
59. Krik? Krak! Edwidge Danticat (1995)
60. Nickel & Dimed, Barbara Ehrenreich (2001)
61. Money, Martin Amis (1985)
62. Last Train To Memphis, Peter Guralnick (1994)
63. Pastoralia, George Saunders (2000)
64. Underworld, Don DeLillo (1997)
65. The Giver, Lois Lowry (1993)
66. A Supposedly Fun Thing I’ll Never Do Again, David Foster Wallace (1997)
67. The Kite Runner, Khaled Hosseini (2003)
68. Fun Home, Alison Bechdel (2006)
69. Secret History, Donna Tartt (1992)
70. Cloud Atlas, David Mitchell (2004)
71. The Spirit Catches You and You Fall Down, Ann Fadiman (1997)
72. The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time, Mark Haddon (2003)
73. A Prayer for Owen Meany, John Irving (1989)
74. Friday Night Lights, H.G. Bissinger (1990)
75. Cathedral, Raymond Carver (1983)
76. A Sight for Sore Eyes, Ruth Rendell (1998)
77. The Remains of the Day, Kazuo Ishiguro (1989)
78. Eat, Pray, Love, Elizabeth Gilbert (2006)
79. The Tipping Point, Malcolm Gladwell (2000)
80. Bright Lights, Big City, Jay McInerney (1984)
81. Backlash, Susan Faludi (1991)
82. Atonement, Ian McEwan (2002)
83. The Stone Diaries, Carol Shields (1994)
84. Holes, Louis Sachar (1998)
85. Gilead, Marilynne Robinson (2004)
86. And the Band Played On, Randy Shilts (1987)
87. The Ruins, Scott Smith (2006)
88. High Fidelity, Nick Hornby (1995)
89. Close Range, Annie Proulx (1999)
90. Comfort Me With Apples, Ruth Reichl (2001)
91. Random Family, Adrian Nicole LeBlanc (2003)
92. Presumed Innocent, Scott Turow (1987)
93. A Thousand Acres, Jane Smiley (1991)
94. Fast Food Nation, Eric Schlosser (2001)
95. Kaaterskill Falls, Allegra Goodman (1998)
96. The Da Vinci Code, Dan Brown (2003)
97. Jesus’ Son, Denis Johnson (1992)
98. The Predators' Ball, Connie Bruck (1988)
99. Practical Magic, Alice Hoffman (1995)
100. America (the Book), Jon Stewart/Daily Show (2004)
I can't find anywhere the criteria that Entertainment Weekly used to compile this list, and I don't even know if it's ranked, but from this list, and the other top 100 lists they have on their site, I suspect that it was compiled by editors, writers, employees, or others at the organization.
There are two really interesting things in this list that don't usually appear in literature lists:
graphic novels
non-fiction
Both of these genres are usually eliminated in lists of best literature (which is what I read "new classics" to mean, but perhaps I'm off base here), even though they belong under the classification of literature. There's also a short story collection, a genre that usually isn't included either. I think it shows a greater appreciation for writing in general that the compilers of the list didn't limit themselves to fiction novels, even if some of their selections make me scratch my head, wondering what the conversation looked like that led to their inclusion.
Considering that I've been having children or going through school for most of that time, I'm acutally surprised at the number of books on that list that I've spent time with. I've read 23 of the books on the list, though I would've only pegged maybe 7 of them if you'd asked me to make a "new classics" list of books over the last 25 years. Maybe I'm just too snooty, but I have a hard time considering Bridget Jones Diary or Bel Canto as "classic". Fun books, good stories, but classic? Maybe I just have a different definition of classic.
Perhaps as Berube writes, like all lists, it is the compiling and justification of the list that produces a critical response to popular culture, and what's on the list isn't as important as the thoughts and justifications that go into compiling of the list by its authors, and the objections written by its readers.
Most of the people I know make lists. Some of them obsessively. Some just make them in their heads. But the attraction of the list seems to supercede gender or occupation or income level.
So what is it about lists that fascinates us?
I ran across a list that caught my attention. Yes, it's a literature list. But this one strikes me as different from many of the lists I've encountered before. I wanted to blog about this list. Of course I've found that Michael Berube has already written about popular culture and lists, and of course he says must smarter things than I can about pop culture and lists, but since his essay is eight years old, I'm gonna take a swing at talking about this latest list anyway. Perhaps there's something more to add to a contemplation of list making.
There's something very unusual about Entertainment Weekly's "New Classics" book list (by new classics they mean books published between 1983 and 2008). What struck me was that there are some things on the list that I wouldn't normally think of as classics.
1. The Road , Cormac McCarthy (2006)
2. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, J.K. Rowling (2000)
3. Beloved, Toni Morrison (1987)
4. The Liars' Club, Mary Karr (1995)
5. American Pastoral, Philip Roth (1997)
6. Mystic River, Dennis Lehane (2001)
7. Maus, Art Spiegelman (1986/1991)
8. Selected Stories, Alice Munro (1996)
9. Cold Mountain, Charles Frazier (1997)
10. The Wind-Up Bird Chronicle, Haruki Murakami (1997)
11. Into Thin Air, Jon Krakauer (1997)
12. Blindness, José Saramago (1998)
13. Watchmen, Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons (1986-87)
14. Black Water, Joyce Carol Oates (1992)
15. A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius, Dave Eggers (2000)
16. The Handmaid's Tale, Margaret Atwood (1986)
17. Love in the Time of Cholera, Gabriel GarcÃa Márquez (1988)
18. Rabbit at Rest, John Updike (1990)
19. On Beauty, Zadie Smith (2005)
20. Bridget Jones's Diary, Helen Fielding (1998)
21. On Writing, Stephen King (2000)
22. The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao, Junot DÃaz (2007)
23. The Ghost Road, Pat Barker (1996)
24. Lonesome Dove, Larry McMurtry (1985)
25. The Joy Luck Club, Amy Tan (1989)
26. Neuromancer, William Gibson (1984)
27. Possession, A.S. Byatt (1990)
28. Naked, David Sedaris (1997)
29. Bel Canto, Anne Patchett (2001)
30. Case Histories, Kate Atkinson (2004)
31. The Things They Carried, Tim O'Brien (1990)
32. Parting the Waters, Taylor Branch (1988)
33. The Year of Magical Thinking, Joan Didion (2005)
34. The Lovely Bones, Alice Sebold (2002)
35. The Line of Beauty, Alan Hollinghurst (2004)
36. Angela's Ashes, Frank McCourt (1996)
37. Persepolis, Marjane Satrapi (2003)
38. Birds of America, Lorrie Moore (1998)
39. Interpreter of Maladies, Jhumpa Lahiri (2000)
40. His Dark Materials, Philip Pullman (1995-2000)
41. The House on Mango Street, Sandra Cisneros (1984)
42. LaBrava, Elmore Leonard (1983)
43. Borrowed Time, Paul Monette (1988)
44. Praying for Sheetrock, Melissa Fay Greene (1991)
45. Eva Luna, Isabel Allende (1988)
46. Sandman, Neil Gaiman (1988-1996)
47. World's Fair, E.L. Doctorow (1985)
48. The Poisonwood Bible, Barbara Kingsolver (1998)
49. Clockers, Richard Price (1992)
50. The Corrections, Jonathan Franzen (2001)
51. The Journalist and the Murderer, Janet Malcom (1990)
52. Waiting to Exhale, Terry McMillan (1992)
53. The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay, Michael Chabon (2000)
54. Jimmy Corrigan, Chris Ware (2000)
55. The Glass Castle, Jeannette Walls (2006)
56. The Night Manager, John le Carré (1993)
57. The Bonfire of the Vanities, Tom Wolfe (1987)
58. Drop City, TC Boyle (2003)
59. Krik? Krak! Edwidge Danticat (1995)
60. Nickel & Dimed, Barbara Ehrenreich (2001)
61. Money, Martin Amis (1985)
62. Last Train To Memphis, Peter Guralnick (1994)
63. Pastoralia, George Saunders (2000)
64. Underworld, Don DeLillo (1997)
65. The Giver, Lois Lowry (1993)
66. A Supposedly Fun Thing I’ll Never Do Again, David Foster Wallace (1997)
67. The Kite Runner, Khaled Hosseini (2003)
68. Fun Home, Alison Bechdel (2006)
69. Secret History, Donna Tartt (1992)
70. Cloud Atlas, David Mitchell (2004)
71. The Spirit Catches You and You Fall Down, Ann Fadiman (1997)
72. The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time, Mark Haddon (2003)
73. A Prayer for Owen Meany, John Irving (1989)
74. Friday Night Lights, H.G. Bissinger (1990)
75. Cathedral, Raymond Carver (1983)
76. A Sight for Sore Eyes, Ruth Rendell (1998)
77. The Remains of the Day, Kazuo Ishiguro (1989)
78. Eat, Pray, Love, Elizabeth Gilbert (2006)
79. The Tipping Point, Malcolm Gladwell (2000)
80. Bright Lights, Big City, Jay McInerney (1984)
81. Backlash, Susan Faludi (1991)
82. Atonement, Ian McEwan (2002)
83. The Stone Diaries, Carol Shields (1994)
84. Holes, Louis Sachar (1998)
85. Gilead, Marilynne Robinson (2004)
86. And the Band Played On, Randy Shilts (1987)
87. The Ruins, Scott Smith (2006)
88. High Fidelity, Nick Hornby (1995)
89. Close Range, Annie Proulx (1999)
90. Comfort Me With Apples, Ruth Reichl (2001)
91. Random Family, Adrian Nicole LeBlanc (2003)
92. Presumed Innocent, Scott Turow (1987)
93. A Thousand Acres, Jane Smiley (1991)
94. Fast Food Nation, Eric Schlosser (2001)
95. Kaaterskill Falls, Allegra Goodman (1998)
96. The Da Vinci Code, Dan Brown (2003)
97. Jesus’ Son, Denis Johnson (1992)
98. The Predators' Ball, Connie Bruck (1988)
99. Practical Magic, Alice Hoffman (1995)
100. America (the Book), Jon Stewart/Daily Show (2004)
I can't find anywhere the criteria that Entertainment Weekly used to compile this list, and I don't even know if it's ranked, but from this list, and the other top 100 lists they have on their site, I suspect that it was compiled by editors, writers, employees, or others at the organization.
There are two really interesting things in this list that don't usually appear in literature lists:
graphic novels
non-fiction
Both of these genres are usually eliminated in lists of best literature (which is what I read "new classics" to mean, but perhaps I'm off base here), even though they belong under the classification of literature. There's also a short story collection, a genre that usually isn't included either. I think it shows a greater appreciation for writing in general that the compilers of the list didn't limit themselves to fiction novels, even if some of their selections make me scratch my head, wondering what the conversation looked like that led to their inclusion.
Considering that I've been having children or going through school for most of that time, I'm acutally surprised at the number of books on that list that I've spent time with. I've read 23 of the books on the list, though I would've only pegged maybe 7 of them if you'd asked me to make a "new classics" list of books over the last 25 years. Maybe I'm just too snooty, but I have a hard time considering Bridget Jones Diary or Bel Canto as "classic". Fun books, good stories, but classic? Maybe I just have a different definition of classic.
Perhaps as Berube writes, like all lists, it is the compiling and justification of the list that produces a critical response to popular culture, and what's on the list isn't as important as the thoughts and justifications that go into compiling of the list by its authors, and the objections written by its readers.
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Editing vs Writing
There's something so productive about writing - you type and see the words emerge on the page. You can watch a word count grow (like on my dissertation meter). You feel like you're moving forward, even if it's just a paragraph a day.
Editing is another beast altogether. It doesn't feel as progressive because it involves working with material you've already worked with. Sometimes that's tough.
The post-writing editing, you know where you go over the section you've just written, or the paper you've finished, or the chapter you've completed, and edit for clarity and conciseness, flow, paragraph formation, eliminating awkward phrasing, reconstructing sentences and proofreading isn't hard. Perhaps because it takes place right after the writing, it seems easier. Perhaps it's because you know what changes need to be made.
Integrating someone else's suggestions is harder. Necessary, because their distance from the project means their comments are invaluable, but harder. Part of it sometimes is deciphering their handwriting, or your notes from a meeting (this one's particularly hard for me). But sometimes an editing note can be clear, as in "this doesn't work," but figuring out how to fix it is hard. That of course is the tough part.
For the next several weeks I figure the only thing I'll be doing is editing. On top of the fact that my online work is all editing right now, by the time I returned home last week, I had feedback on four different dissertation chapters. Editing four chapters at a time will require a lot of work. Then three days later, I got an email about the book chapter I submitted. As I mentioned earlier, not only do I have to change the formatting from MLA to Chicago style, but I have to cut almost a third of the paper.
That cutting is painful. I've been working on it for three days, and at the end of each of those days, I've only cut a small fraction of what I need to, but I throw up my hands in the air and declare "I cannot cut anything else from this paper without seriously damaging the argument!"
Funny thing is, the next day I sit down again and find another little piece that can be trimmed. So maybe I can make it down to the necessary page count. Then again, each day, the amount I cut seems to get smaller and smaller. And I worry that once I look at what's left, the argument will indeed be damaged.
My hope lies in a banner on my computer that reads "manage reader expectations" which I think of as the mantra for writing. (Of course managing reader expectations means you need to know those expectations, which has been a major problem with the dissertation project, but that's another blog post.) But I'm discovering that managing reader expectations applies to editing too.
As I re-read every sentence in that paper, sometimes multiple times, I find myself asking if the reader wants or expects this sentence, phrase, or even word. It seems to help me focus, and all I can do is hope that by the time I whittle it down to the prescribed page count, that focus will keep the argument intact. I find that phrasing it in terms of whether the reader wants it there (not me, because I want everything to stay - all my words are precious!) also helps me cut what I spent so much time writing.
Keep your fingers crossed for me that I can reach page count!
Editing is another beast altogether. It doesn't feel as progressive because it involves working with material you've already worked with. Sometimes that's tough.
The post-writing editing, you know where you go over the section you've just written, or the paper you've finished, or the chapter you've completed, and edit for clarity and conciseness, flow, paragraph formation, eliminating awkward phrasing, reconstructing sentences and proofreading isn't hard. Perhaps because it takes place right after the writing, it seems easier. Perhaps it's because you know what changes need to be made.
Integrating someone else's suggestions is harder. Necessary, because their distance from the project means their comments are invaluable, but harder. Part of it sometimes is deciphering their handwriting, or your notes from a meeting (this one's particularly hard for me). But sometimes an editing note can be clear, as in "this doesn't work," but figuring out how to fix it is hard. That of course is the tough part.
For the next several weeks I figure the only thing I'll be doing is editing. On top of the fact that my online work is all editing right now, by the time I returned home last week, I had feedback on four different dissertation chapters. Editing four chapters at a time will require a lot of work. Then three days later, I got an email about the book chapter I submitted. As I mentioned earlier, not only do I have to change the formatting from MLA to Chicago style, but I have to cut almost a third of the paper.
That cutting is painful. I've been working on it for three days, and at the end of each of those days, I've only cut a small fraction of what I need to, but I throw up my hands in the air and declare "I cannot cut anything else from this paper without seriously damaging the argument!"
Funny thing is, the next day I sit down again and find another little piece that can be trimmed. So maybe I can make it down to the necessary page count. Then again, each day, the amount I cut seems to get smaller and smaller. And I worry that once I look at what's left, the argument will indeed be damaged.
My hope lies in a banner on my computer that reads "manage reader expectations" which I think of as the mantra for writing. (Of course managing reader expectations means you need to know those expectations, which has been a major problem with the dissertation project, but that's another blog post.) But I'm discovering that managing reader expectations applies to editing too.
As I re-read every sentence in that paper, sometimes multiple times, I find myself asking if the reader wants or expects this sentence, phrase, or even word. It seems to help me focus, and all I can do is hope that by the time I whittle it down to the prescribed page count, that focus will keep the argument intact. I find that phrasing it in terms of whether the reader wants it there (not me, because I want everything to stay - all my words are precious!) also helps me cut what I spent so much time writing.
Keep your fingers crossed for me that I can reach page count!
Sunday, July 13, 2008
Celebrating the work!
I opened my email this morning to find a message from one of the reviewers for a book chapter that's been floating out there for about six months. It was a lovely email and very encouraging, with a very very good reason for not having heard about its status. Frankly, at six months, it's the one I've spent the least time waiting for! (And I know the book collection editor, so I knew she'd get to me when it worked. I wasn't as worried about this one as the others.)
I've got it back, and the only revision I need to do is some SERIOUS trimming to reach page length and a complete switch from MLA to Chicago style citation. Took a look at my Chicago style manual - it's 12 years old. Guess I'll need an update!
The trimming will be harder, because I have to lose almost 30% of it, which will be hard since all the elements of the argument seem necessary to me. I'll just have to work up a really ruthless attitude and then tear into it mercilessly. *sigh* We'll have to see how it goes. The good news is, with a deadline for the edits, I'm hopeful that there will be a publication date that I can put on my c.v. when I send it out this fall. At least I hope so!
I've got it back, and the only revision I need to do is some SERIOUS trimming to reach page length and a complete switch from MLA to Chicago style citation. Took a look at my Chicago style manual - it's 12 years old. Guess I'll need an update!
The trimming will be harder, because I have to lose almost 30% of it, which will be hard since all the elements of the argument seem necessary to me. I'll just have to work up a really ruthless attitude and then tear into it mercilessly. *sigh* We'll have to see how it goes. The good news is, with a deadline for the edits, I'm hopeful that there will be a publication date that I can put on my c.v. when I send it out this fall. At least I hope so!
Saturday, July 12, 2008
RBOC: thoughts upon returning home
- My laptop is really no longer an efficient tool. This was driven home to me when I found a plug in the airport lounge and sat down to work. Although I sat down at least 5 solid minutes before the man beside me, he was booted up and clicking away while I was still watching the little hourglass. And he probably didn't need to plug in within 20 minutes of bootup in order to avoid running out of battery power. Ugh. It's functional, which is why I still use it, but one could not by any stretch of the imagination call it efficient.
- Meeting with your entire committee within three days because you're only in town once or twice a year is an intense experience. Normally, if one of them had something discouraging to say, you'd have at least a few weeks to digest it before hearing what the next one said. Not so when you're only in town for a week and need to meet with everyone at once.
- I got good feedback, did necessary paperwork, picked up hard copies of things I needed, cleaned out the last of my crap out of my old office. Which is what I set out to accomplish.
- Dissertation writing group was good. Meeting with my advisor just before the group was probably a good plan, but it meant that I spent much of the evening feeling on edge. That's because my dissertation has not been heading in the direction it should be. Good to know that. But disturbing to realize my vision is not in line with what I need to do. At one point during our meeting, my advisor looked at me and said, "this is distressing you, isn't it?" Yep. Distressed is a very good word for it. I was thinking that I'd seriously miscalculated my entire grad education to that point and that I also was not capable of doing what she was asking. Those kinds of thoughts are enough to take anyone's breath away.
- Come to think of it, this is the second time I've had a conversation with my advisor that has made me feel like I made a colossal mistake in choosing first the school, and now the project. Is it just my advisor? Or have I really made some colossal blunders? I honestly don't know. Don't suppose it matters though, really. I mean, what are my options? Chuck it all away? I don't think so. So I keep going. But meanwhile, I wonder. Actually, I try not to think about it because my breath still catches in my throat at the thought of what it might cost if this was a colossal mistake.
- Much of the work I need to do now involves a rethinking of the project, which I'm sure will induce more anxiety as I struggle to change what feels natural to me into the project that my advisor has told me I must write. It's not that she's autocratic, she's right. It's just that I've been thinking about my project for so long in one way that it's just plain hard to think of it in the way I need to.
- On a more positive note, I had an absolutely wonderful couple of evenings with friends that really made up for all the distress of meeting with my committee, and the huge pile of work that needs to be done now. I feel privileged to be able to count such wonderful people as being in my corner, willing to listen to my ramblings, share their stories, and just plain be as glad to be with me as I am with them. It's also nice to see those kinds of people physically, in person. I'm all for the electronic age, but it sure don't beat a hug and a smile!
Wednesday, July 09, 2008
I didn't cry this time!
This time when I visited friends at PhD city, I didn't cry! I was made to swear I wouldn't cry. Probably because last time I was here with everyone I got really maudlin over the fact that I missed everyone.So, congratulations to me. I managed to stay dry-eyed, even if at other times I felt odd, or out of place, or even a bit distressed (talking to advisor).
I didn't cry!
Saturday, July 05, 2008
Capitalism, collaboration and Collective Intelligence
People as wise a Bill Gates have argued that capitalism is undermined by any movement to assemble a global "creative commons" that contains large bodies of scientific and cultural contentDon Tapscott, We are smarter than Me
Part of me bristles at Bill Gates's so utterly wholehearted embrace of capitalism that he would dis creative commons project just because it is collaborative. I would suggest *gasp* that capitalism is not all it's cracked up to be, and perhaps a little bit more recognition of our commonality might do the human race a whole lotta good.
But maybe it's just the traffic that makes me say that.
Let me explain. I've been bullied by people driving large vehicles for the last year, as I drive my (very) small, fuel efficient car around. Guys in big trucks like to tailgate me, which means as a defensive driver, I drop my speed in order to increase the gap between me and the person in front in order to allow enough time for the joker behind me to react without hitting me in case I have to suddenly brake. (Yes, a digression, but bear with me)
A few weeks ago in the local paper, a couple of newly transplanted Americans were complaining in the letters to the editor that Canadian pedestrians step out into crosswalks when the light is for them without looking for vehicles (that would be illegally entering the crosswalk). They said that pedestrians in American cities (their words, not mine) were more cautious (and hence less stupid?) I was confused at what the complaint was about. But being in PhD city again, I remember that as a pedestrian you take your life into your own hands here - the car rules, whether you have the right of way or not.
So what does this have to do with commonality?
Well, I think that the aggression of large trucks and the inability of drivers to stop for pedestrians stem from the same attitude. That attitude sees others in public spaces as objects, or potential obstacles in one's way. That attitude makes it easy to lose track of the fact that there are people in each of those cars, and the pedestrian wants to move through space efficiently just the same as you do. Would you not stop for a friend crossing the road? Would you tailgate the car that you knew was being driven by your mother?
It's because we so easily become overwhelmed by the number of people around us that we forget that they are people, who have the same feelings and thoughts as we do. There are so many people surrounding those of us who live in large cities that we forget that they are PEOPLE, not objects.
Capitalism also rests on the assumption that all the "agents" in the system are just that, parts of a system in which the individuality of each of those agents gets lost in the theory. Really, that's a lot of what Marx was talking about.* Collaborative creations, whether they are driven by a creative or an economic urge, can't help but remind us that we are not the only people on earth surrounded by objects or obstacles in our way. They remind us that some of those objects or obstacles are people. People who feel and think in ways eerily similar to our own (or sometimes, even more eerily, dissimilar to our own!)
There's another important part of that sentence, that I'm poignantly reminded of, having recently been in two different countries for their successive celebrations of their nations' creation. "capitalism is undermined by any movement to assemble a global "creative commons" that contains large bodies of scientific and cultural content". The global nature of our culture has been (over)stated many times before. But the kind of divisions created by nationalism - the dominant means for dividing cultures and peoples over the last few centuries - have also brought damage through misplaced patriotisms, boundary disputes, and the need to retain "sovereignty". Perhaps a reminder of our commonality, our collective intelligence, rather than divisions along national (or even ethnic) lines could do us a lot of good.
I realize that this blog post borders on the lines of... what, flights of fantasy? Some might accuse me of Pollyannism. Fair enough. But we've tried intellectual property rights, increasing copyright legislation (think DRM and P2P), nationalism, division, the spread of capitalism... perhaps its time for a new plan?
*I realize Marx was much more complex than this simple reduction, but much of his theory rests upon the assumption that people are people, not cogs in a machine.
Thursday, July 03, 2008
You really can't go back...
As an optimist, I've always thought the sentiment "you can't go home again" was awfully pessimistic. Even when I moved back to the city I'd left 4 years earlier, I still retained the hope that you could indeed go home again. Sure, some of the people I had known were gone, but the city itself was still there, the restaurants that I loved, and even some new places.
But traveling back to PhD city after moving away almost 2 years ago has felt weird. Very weird. It's all recognizable. But everything has changed. Even though many of the same people are here, the relationships are all changed.
It's more than just a wall where a door used to be.
I feel like I don't belong.
And I suppose I don't. I've been so long away from all the usual activities, I suppose I shouldn't actually expect to feel like I belong. But I did. And the shock of realizing I was wrong threw me for a bit of a loop earlier this afternoon.
You CAN'T go back. Maybe it's not a bad thing. But it's definitely true.
But traveling back to PhD city after moving away almost 2 years ago has felt weird. Very weird. It's all recognizable. But everything has changed. Even though many of the same people are here, the relationships are all changed.
It's more than just a wall where a door used to be.
I feel like I don't belong.
And I suppose I don't. I've been so long away from all the usual activities, I suppose I shouldn't actually expect to feel like I belong. But I did. And the shock of realizing I was wrong threw me for a bit of a loop earlier this afternoon.
You CAN'T go back. Maybe it's not a bad thing. But it's definitely true.
Tuesday, July 01, 2008
Happy Canada Day!
Happy Canada Day! I hope you had a day that featured at least a bit of relaxation... even if you aren't Canadian!For the first time in a long time, I did not host a Canada Day barbecue - oldest daughter did instead! What a nice feeling being able to just show up with food, then sit back and relax!
She did a fabulous job as a host, and even had some really neat games/activities planned. I know she's doing the whole run down of everything that didn't go as she envisioned it, but she did an absolutely wonderful job! Hope everyone else had as nice a day as I did!
On an unrelated note, I am heading off to meet with advisors and other smart people for the next week, so posting may be sparse... then again, it may be particularly prolific, who knows? But I will be on a different routine, so it's hard to say...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)