good god

I really have no idea what to write in response to this weeks readings. The articles were pretty self-explanatory and everyone else has taken up the various points that the articles make.

For the most part, I don't think the articles provide us with any new information, so to speak: we all know we're fucked in this new corporate university.

What I think is important, and perhaps something the articles allude to, is the representation of academics. I don't just mean in films like Tenure, or novels like Lucky Jim.

How does Macleans represent academia? How do university websites/general propaganda represent academics? How do we represent ourselves, or allow ourselves to be represented? We study representations and yet we fail to pay attention to how we are represented.

Most people think academics, especially in the Humanities, spend a lot of their time arguing about nothing of particular importance. And i actually think most people do a whole lot of nothing in the jobs/careers. Like how many times do you have to go to a doctor before they actually know what is wrong with you? But I digress!

At the last department council meeting there was a very big debate between the faculty over whether or not to change the first half of course titles; instead of writing "Studies in American Literature" it will now read "Studies in American Texts." Some professors lamented the loss of literature, while others argued for the "capaciousness" of texts. Now, this title does not limit the actual course content, despite what some professors seemed to think, it is merely for organizational purposes and for the graduate calendar. The graduate calendar is one way that what academics do is represented to prospective students and outsiders.

Do you study texts or literature? Does it matter? And are the representations of academics as irrelevant correct?

I think it is time that humanities departments hired some seriously amazing PR firms to revitalize the image of the humanities professor so that we can still do what we do, but people see the representation as something that represents something relevant.