Whimsical and personal! Delicacy and bluntness! French and Italian! Butler in the streets, nanny in the sheets. I give up!
a Gen-X Princeton professor
Arguably the least-cool possible description of an individual.
Mallory Ortberg did a better job of mocking conferences and questions that aren't really questions.
Anyway, neb, you shouldn't make fun of Princeton assistant professors; you should pity them since they're going to be fired shortly.
why gender is becoming more rather than less complicated
I can only hope this essay includes a graph.
5 - Will it be acyclic and directed? Can we apply a topological ordering?
I wonder if I can get a review copy of this book.
There is no nosflow more lovable than catty nosflow.
7: yes. Write the press, explain that you are a "blogger" at an "eclectic web magazine," and I'm quite certain that some unwitting publicity flack -- no doubt a very recent graduate of Barnard or Vassar -- will send you a copy of the book.
6: Modeled on Minard's graph of Napoleon's invasion of Russia.
I was just thinking like a simple line plot, with the y-axis going from "totally not complicated" to "super duper complicated" and the x axis going from "a while ago" to "nowish".
But really, the part that resembles pac-man only resembles pac-man in virtue of the part which does not resemble pac-man, and vice versa; neither can be said to have the quality attributed to it alone in isolation, but only as members of a mutually determined and determining, reciprocal (wechselseitig) system.
I totally thought you were referring to Princeton Mom and was wondering just how her m.o. would have been improved by a passing familiarity with Perec.
All graphs of change over time need to include the time of 0 on one of the axes.
I read Awkwardness and liked it also. I didn't real his other books because I was afraid even the not-Zizek book would somehow lead to reading Zizek.
Ironically, Tiger Mom didn't attend Princeton.
Also, I've never heard of Princeton Irony Lady.
How much would a book like The Other Serious, published by a non-academic press, count against you in terms of tenure at Princeton? And how many powers would the negative be raised by the blurb: whimsical, paradigm-shifting, etc.?Seem like they would really draw out the long knives.
Yeah conferences are boring. It's a bunch of academics. We're boring -- a bunch of socially obtuse nerdy needy little assholes convinced that My Research is important, else ytf would we spend so much time on it. What, she thinks she's the first person to skip the sessions to sit by pool?
I dunno, maybe she's a terrific scholar in her field. In which case she might be well advised to stick to it because arch doesn't suit her.
If you're going to study early 20th century Italian essays, why not be more interesting by going full fascist. Then you know what to do!
I, uh, have some familiarity, uh, with Professor Wampole's work and career, and the "both French and Italian" is a matter of most students in the department picking one or the other as a specialty, while she actually did the quals and coursework and so on for both fields (a great thing to do!). Uh, hey look over there, did you guys read Rebecca Goldstein's takedown of the Shop Class as Soulcraft guy? Recommended if you like this kind of thing!
Her career is certainly distinguished, you know? She is one of the more distinguished junior faculty I can think of. I'm not being Bourdieuvian here; I'm speaking in absolute terms. Her ability to bullshit aging humanists is kind of astounding and almost inspires envy. I don't know how much you'd have to pay me to get me to read the book. I'm thinking five- rather than four-digit numbers.
Invade Fiume! Invade Corfu! Invade Abyssinia! Do it! Do it now!
Those aging humanists are pussies! Will of iron! Tanks! Motorcycles! Ancient Rome at the size of Trajan's empire! Do it! Do it now!
I can't be expected to remember comments I wrote in 2012. Also, there's a difference between having heard of "Princeton Irony Lady" and having read an article whose author some refer to by that name.
18: the early universe is notable for its unusually low smugness. If anything, without the general and unstoppable increase in smugness, we'd have no way to determine the direction of the arrow of time.
24: I withdraw my snark about French & Italian, then. I did request a review copy (so you won't have to read it, you see), though I did not mention the name of the eclectic web magazine—known for its reviews and book events—for which I write, since I thought the nature of the current topmost post might decrease the likelihood of my boon being granted.
It's funny that I commented that I thought the article's argument sounded like something I've read before because I'm starting to re-read it and having trouble believing I've ever read it before.
Ehhhhh Goldstein's piece strikes me as pretty sloppy; I'm willing to believe that Crawford's book is also sloppy but it doesn't seem like a very good piece itself.
maybe she's a terrific scholar in her field
and I am Marie of Rou oh Christ, the field is messed up, the standards are low; she is certainly committed and curious and all that stuff. I think I can still say no: the only objective measure is influence, and I bet she has almost zero. I'd be genuinely fascinated to learn otherwise. I also 100% approve the transformation suggested by Ripper.
I'll just continue non-ironically narcissistically serial commenting on this thread to say I ended up with the same reaction, but still with no specific memory of having read that article before. It feels kind of David Brooksy this time.
How does one reconcile "one of the more distinguished junior faculty I can think of" with "I bet she has almost zero [influence]"?
35: Probably using some kind of graph.
She seems to have several publications to her name, anyway.
The Goldstein also struck me as sloppy but I'm the kind of person who will excuse fairly serious argumentative errors for the pleasure of reading "Crawford's argument against the Enlightenment isn't, to my knowledge, one we've heard before, since his rendition of the Enlightenment isn't, to my knowledge, one we've heard before." It's obviously not a serious engagement with the book but gives the clear impression that a lack of serious engagement is sane and healthy. Push harder here and I'll admit that I'll just take any number of dubious allies in my longstanding beef with the Committee on Social Thought.
35: oh, to make it explicit, I mean she distinguished herself by writing very bad stuff in a national forum, so, you know. Is the word not actually ambivalent like that? Maybe not.
Does this mean I can still be ironic?
It is but I don't think the reading you intended was particularly active (for this reader, anyway) in 24, rendering the ambiguity less apparent.
So I guess that's a "no," Moby. I wonder if I've called someone "distinguished" with a straight face. Probably. Maybe even here.
Outstanding Achievement in the Field of Disntiguishment
You didn't mean "distinguished" you meant "having shown distinguitude"
Anyway her doctoral advisor has indeed studied futurism and races motorcycles. To take it slightly back to Crawford, I have been motorcycle-curious for a long time but just don't think I could handle the noise. I like noisy music, so why not engine roar? Is it too mindless and sticky? Frequency? Has anyone here tried and gotten past it?
You can't spell egregious professor without Regius.
the pleasure of reading "Crawford's argument against the Enlightenment isn't, to my knowledge, one we've heard before, since his rendition of the Enlightenment isn't, to my knowledge, one we've heard before."
But it seems that his version of the enlightenment is actually one that we've heard many times before? Isn't it a pretty standard-issue anti-enlightenment line? I mean, maybe she hasn't in fact heard it before, but that speaks in her disfavor, not Crawford's.
Also it's "C. Montgomery Burns", you philistine. His first name is Charles. Jesus.
Shh. Do you want to get sued?
I'm not completely in agreement with 47, but I am convinced that it would be a total waste of our time to pursue the matter further here, with apologies.
Isn't that how people call other people assholes when they are trying to be indirect about it?
Telling them they'd be a good customer for a BMW.
15 & 16 were me as well if "Princeton Mom" was the don't-marry-a-third-tier-toilet-husband lady.
You should only marry somebody who shits in a Toto or better.
The inernetically disliked women of Princeton cohort is growing quite substantial. Maybe they should form a PAC.
I don't see what's so wrong about blithering about conferences or irony in the pages of the NYT. Anything that takes up space potentially blocks more David Brooks from appearing.
She's definitely no more than halfway out the Line 'o The Times in Wanker-Wingnut space.
Inernetics was the precursor to Digitalogy.
a bunch of socially obtuse nerdy needy little assholes
Should this be an Unfogged mouseover? Should it be the motto that we hang over the door at the anarchist center where I teach a community ed class? Does it describe everyone, like an astrology column, or does it just describe me and all the people I know?
The latter, I think. "Nerdy" is the tip-off: you could probably cover everyone with "needy little assholes", but there's nerdy-style (Unfogged and the rest of your acquaintance) and less-nerdy style.
||
This seems like the least-bad thread to put this in. Rowan pled guilty and was sentenced today, 10 years for the gun stuff and 3 for the credit card fraud, though he'll serve them concurrently. His lawyer didn't offer any mitigating factors, probably because he's feeling guilty and didn't want to use his history as an excuse and it's not an excuse but he sure as hell has mitigating circumstances and oh well this is why I'm not involved I guess. My mom was there so that it could be on record that she'd heard his apology, though he mumbled and she's just guessing at it. From what he's told me about parole, he'll be eligible in about 8.5 years, meaning he'll be 29 when he gets out. I was 29 when I stepped into my quasi-parental role with him, and that especially breaks my heart. But he's going into a program with sort of a trade-school focus and at least now he can get appropriate mental health and substance abuse treatment, which he couldn't in the regular jail. Fuck.
|>
That sucks. 10 years concurrent with parole at 8.5 is ridiculous. I mean not by the standards of our current system, but that's a hell of a long time to be in prison.
That sucks. 10 years concurrent with parole at 8.5 is ridiculous. I mean not by the standards of our current system, but that's a hell of a long time to be in prison.
I might be wrong about 8.5. The stuff about what went on in court is from my mom. The 8.5 was from him previously, but this sounds like a less-good deal than he was offered last time, so I kind of doubt that has improved. I don't know for sure yet.
You, dear delurker, need a BMW motorcycle.
Alarming sycamore delurked a long time ago.
Ugh. That's got to be rough on you and your mom regardless of the sentencing.
I'm so sorry, Thorn. This whole thing seems so monstrously unfair for everyone involved.
So sorry. That's just awful. Poor you, poor him.
Engine noise is not overwhelming from on the motorcycle, it's louder behind. I agree BMW, or in fact any non-American-V-twin would be much quieter too.
And the motorcyclist's quarrel is famously with Ideas and Methods, not Social Thought.
Straight English Dept., no committee, many years ago for me. Theory before Theory.
For the time being, he's safe, he's fed, he'll get some sort of minimal treatment at least and some sort of minimal education at least. All of those are better than recent alternatives. But 8+ years of that is depressing.
Sounds kind of graduate school when you put it that way.
10 years is obscene if he took a plea, people get less than that for manslaughter. Unfortunately 8.5 years might be true because some states require serving 85% of the sentence for "violent" crimes. Which means that prosecutors have almost dictatorial discretion in some cases: they can charge you with x or with y (say burglary vs larceny) and 1st or 3rd degree, so the sentence could vary from 10 years for the former combination to one year or less for the latter combo.
And there's the "trial penalty" if you take it to a jury and get convicted, which is the judge piling on some additional years because you wasted the court's time by exercising your constitutional right to a jury trial by your peers.
God, how depressing. My sympathies to everyone involved.
That's terrible, Thorn. You have my sympathies.
I don't know how much wiggle room there really was. As the judge apparently said, the state cares that people have a right to go about their daily lives and not have a gun pulled on them. The gun makes it difficult to get certain charges lowered and these were all pretty clearly fitting the definition of the offense, so I don't know how much wigggle room there was because of mandatory minimums and so on. There's zero chance he could have avoided conviction in a jury trial, but I'm sad that his lawyer recommended against taking the first settlement offer and then let him end up with one that sounds definitely no better and possibly worse instead after more time in jail with no support. Sigh.
I'm okay. I've known since October or at least since he turned himself in in November that something like this is what to expect. My mom was more shaken by it, but maybe conservatives need that sort of thing, or maybe she'd been protecting herself by seeming so stable about it and now isn't, which would also be normal. We'll still be there for him and I'll visit and send packages and so on. I do hope he'll learn what he needs to be an employable former felon. And maybe by then laws will have changed enough that he can vote!
And there's the "trial penalty" if you take it to a jury and get convicted, which is the judge piling on some additional years because you wasted the court's time by exercising your constitutional right to a jury trial by your peers.
Wait what? How is that remotely legal?
Ugh, sorry, Thorn.
68: Pseud change? Am I dense?
A bit less than 1000 kg/m^3, I'd think.
68: Pseud change? Am I dense?
Alarming sycamore's partner is, hm, aglona stairclimber, maybe?
79 Say the sentence range is 2 years min 10 years max and the prosecutor offered 4 years if you took a plea. The judge can -- and criminal attorneys I know say often will -- sentence you to ~7-8 or maybe even the full 10 just to send a message to the lawyers to tell their clients that the courts are busy and the accused better recognize that their role in the criminal justice system is fodder.
85 is good but I was trying to keep the initial letters matching.
84: Oh, I see; I was imagining extra time on top of the maximum, somehow. What you describe is easier to comprehend as constitutional but still outrageous.
oooooh shoot yeah. Aglona seems like the right choice, then. Aglona Skipjack?
That sucks monumentally, Thorn. My sympathies.
In retrospect I should've packaged these as a book about the delicacy and bluntness of American life, about how pop culture sticks its finger deeply into the ethical dilemmas of our time, and how to negotiate between the old and new, the high and low, the global and local, the sacred and the profane.
The "Can you say more about..." construction was all over at my last conference. At first it was amusing, but then it got annoying. I was going to get up after every presentation and say, "How did you account for multiple comparisons?", but then I realized I don't have tenure and need the people in the audience to hire me.
Also drunk, but earlier I was sober and still dense.
For the time being, he's safe, he's fed, he'll get some sort of minimal treatment at least and some sort of minimal education at least. All of those are better than recent alternatives. But 8+ years of that is depressing.
Something to think about is his odds of success if he were to get out after only a year or two. He's obviously been using and is impulse control is so poor that he brought a stranger with a gun into your mother's house while your other children were there. He doesn't have much in the way of life skills or a support system and that there's a good chance he won't be much different at age 22 than 20. A short sentence with minimal intervention might just doom him to the revolving door. Eight years is a long time but people really are often much more stable and sensible at 29 than 20 so this might make him less likely to re-offend.
just to send a message to the lawyers to tell their clients that the courts are busy and the accused better recognize that their role in the criminal justice system is fodder. if they want leniency the first step is to take some responsibility and that putting everyone through a trial when they're obviously guilty is the kind of thing that makes judges think that person has no intention of changing their ways so the best thing for everyone is to just lock them up.
MY house, but I absolutely hear you, and Lee and I think something along those lines. He's tried to call me today, but only while I've been in meetings where I couldn't really answer. I hope in some respects to be more involved in helping him grow up this time around than I was the last time.
You know, gswift, I am sure that is indeed how the judges involved think of it, but trials really are EVERYBODY'S RIGHT.
96: Yeah, it's hard to think that a long sentence might be the best thing. But I see an endless string of young guys who only get six month to a year in jail on vehicle thefts because "nonviolent felony" and it's absolutely not doing them any favors. They so often just go right back to the same crowd, same neighborhoods, start back up on the meth, and round and round we go.
Case management isn't a legitimate goal of the sentencing process.
You can actually be sentenced to case management in some states.
100 -- no, but effective case management is (at least at a minimum) a necessary goal of the criminal justice system, and beyond that having people admit to responsibility is definitely a legit goal of the justice system. The big problem with our system in the US is that sentences are way too long and that the prisons have (for the most part -- not completely and not for everyone everywhere) completely given up on any semblance of being anything other than holding facilities/gang induction units/rape factories.
98 is definitely true to an extent but the only way to deal with it are immediate punishments that ratchet up.
Multiple "completelys" = automatic self-refutation
And 98 last should be "combined with rehab." There are indeed some hardened assholes for whom the best deal = just stay the fuck out of society until you're 55 and weak, but most people and especially most addicts aren't really like that. I totally buy into rehab+ immediate and ratchet consequences for failing rehab. Plus actual straight jobs for people to do which is the hardest thing of all.
That should have been 100 last. Not demonstrating skills here, but hopefully the criminal justice system will be lenient.
I agree with 104 except for the "98 last", which I'm pretty sure should be 102, and in light of 105 means Ripper's already facing his third strike and that's life, motherfucker.
97: But leniency is not.
Being punitive because someone chooses to exercise their right to a trial isn't the same as merely not being lenient.
Sorry to hear this is how things turned out, Thorn, although I know it wasn't much of a surprise.
Obviously having people take responsibility is a pretty key goal, and I'm all for it particularly in the context of rehabilitation - but is "yes I did it now give me five years off" actually taking responsibility in any meaningful way?
Case management isn't a legitimate goal of the sentencing process.
Agreed - is it too much to ask for judges to determine sentencing based on the specifics of the offence? If you want to penalise the defendant for behaving badly in court, there's a thing called "contempt of court". What this sounds like is defining "not confessing in advance when guilty" as "contempt of court" and punishing it with a stiff prison sentence on top of the one for the original offence, which is kind of malodorous.
110 -- Compared to putting on an opening, cross-examining the state's witnesses, objecting to various bits of incriminating evidence, and making a closing argument, it kind of is.
Posted without reading. Thorn, I'm so sorry.
No problem, Penny. Yours was legitimately exciting news!!
Is her news about Canada? I can't tell.
OMG, I just pulled up Rowan's jail page to make sure he's still there since he hasn't called yet today and I see that he has an additional charge of nonpayment of court fines, as of a date five months after he entered the jail. How is that even a thing once you're incarcerated??? Am I going to have to call his public defender another million times to try to find out if there's anything I can do?