Until we figure out how to deal most effectively with the wiki vandalism, feel free to provide updates in the comments here.
A new wiki has also been established. See the post above for directions and password.
In your comment please note exactly which position(s) you are updating, if possible just cut and paste from the job-search page.
535 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 535 Newer› Newest»Would Princeton, Stanford, or Texas just fucking give this guy a job already so we don't have to ever hear from him again.
The guy is just doing Andy Kaufman pissing off wrestling fans. Nobody is really that pathetic a douchebag; it's just performance art.
And it's not "evil villain."
It's "snotty '80s movie villain." "Karate Kid." "Pretty in Pink." Those guys.
Not, like, an actual villain that anyone would take seriously. Just a "yes, sensai" kind of villain. Possibly riding a dirtbike, or driving his dad's Beamer.
It's obvious that classics is not going to change. Why stay in it? Give me one good reason.
Well, I guess if creating a new field seems like it's worth it to avoid teaching Latin sometimes, then you should probably go. If not, then probably not. Personally, I would think brushing up on my Latin would be easier. Not to mention useful!
As a clarch i am all for finding an institutional situation that will make it possible for Mediterranean archaeologists to be freed from the fetters of texties whose idea of scholarship is playing pattycake with Tibullus.
the notion that teaching one's specialty should be a luxury is crap, as is the argument that all should be happy teaching Latin and Greek b/c the prep is easier and the effort less!? how ridiculous. btw, check the enrollment differentials btwn archaeology sections and your typical Greek 3 class, go talk to your dean, and ask which figures are more impressive at the college level.
i say start the revolution. plus, then none of us would have to listen to the likes of that pedant 'evil villain' posting on this blog.
LMAO -
Helpful UT, you've been a mensch, but as a clarch, I have to point out how ridiculous your statement sounds to anyone but the traditional classicist. So UT has 25 faculty (4 clarchs) and 5 lecturers (1 clarch) and it's two MCers refusing to teach languages that's putting an enormous strain on the other 20 faculty who specialize in using the LANGUAGES...right.
Do a little counting...UT's full-time tenure-track faculty is more like 15 or so right now. So when 3 people can't/won't teach languages, it is a huge strain, particularly when people are on leave. They had to hire FOUR temporary lecturers this year to get things done.
The glory days of UT's 25 faculty lines are long gone. The website simply hasn't been updated.
"the notion that teaching one's specialty should be a luxury is crap"
Yeah, well, welcome to contemporary higher education. You teach what you're an expert in sometimes, and sometimes you teach something you don't know much about.
I've always kind of liked that. It has meant that I've learned things I otherwise wouldn't have.
And I'll add to what another response to you observed, LMAO: it is UT's lit/history people who teach the civ and myth courses, which bring in the huge enrollments that keep the department going. The intro to archaeology courses get nowhere near the enrollment those do. When 2/3 of the department has to cover all the language courses, including graduate, and most of the classical civ courses it's a strain.
I'm sorry, clarchs, I really don't get it.
In my experience historians teach large civ classes, lit people teach large myth and cinema classes, philosophers teach large intellectual civ classes, etc. If you think all non-clarchs do textual criticism then you shouldn't be in Classics because you're clearly ignorant about the discipline. (If that's just because your experience is limited I'm sorry, but you should know better than to extrapolate on a hunch). For the millionth time, the quality of a class depends on the teacher, not on the discipline.
If you don't want to teach the languages, get a job in an anthro. dept. If they don't want you how is that Classics' fault? And if you want your own discipline that's fine too, but why blame us again? Are we standing in your way? I do get that your job prospects suck, for which I'm sympathetic, but your arguments also suck, for which I'm not. Besides we've been through this 'debate' about a million times and every reasonable non-clarch under 40 posting here has said that they would be happy for the situation to change. Might that be too late for your generation? Perhaps. Again, for which I'm sorry. But a revolution? Get real.
I know that FV is for blowing off steam, but I think every historian, philologist, philosopher, and literary critic has had it up to here with your ridiculous, homogenizing characterizations. This kind of idiocy is exactly what can give some of us a pretty poor impression of clarchs. Do I go around thinking all engineers build bridges? Sure, as a joke, but not for real. If you want a job in Classics show some basic (as in five minutes' worth of reflection) understanding of the subject. If you don't want a job here, then go elsewhere. But don't call us names as you demand a job and the instant reconfiguration of the discipline. That's called a tantrum.
As I said, I'm sorry about the employment situation; it's bad for all of us and worse for you. But cut the crap, it just makes you look stupid.
And for those keeping track, 11 interviews and counting.
The how come the highest count on the wiki is 7?
To those of you who think teaching the languages is so much easier than just about anything else, clearly you have never taught elementary Greek/Latin. In most institutions, elementary language courses meet 5 hours a week (as opposed to the 3 hours all the other courses have to meet for). And if you shudder at the thought of explaining a paragraph of Plato to intermediate Greek students, just try explaining accents to a clueless intro Greek class. Unless you know Greek EXTREMELY well (and that rules out quite a few lit. folks and all but the best of clarchs), you're in for a semester of heavy drinking and valium-popping (hopefully not both at once!).
I've often wondered why there isn't a specialized track for language instructors. I'm a lit person and I can teach the languages adequately, and am happy to do so, but I'm the first to admit it's not my forte (shocking, I know, that there's a difference between language and literature). Anyway, I've met some amazing language teachers in my time who eke out an academic career through temporary appointments because their literary or linguistic research is fine but not impressive. Does anyone out there agree that it would be good if these people found long-term employment so that they could really build a strong language program (I know they have something a bit like this at UMich). I bet you'd have more students, better students, and fewer arguments among faculty. Plus at grad institutions these people would do a fantastic job of 1) teaching grads how to teach the languages properly and 2) repairing deficiencies in the grads' own language skills. Any (unpatronizing) thoughts on this?
The how come the highest count on the wiki is 7?
I think it's pretty clear that our snot-nosed teen villain is either a) lying to get everyone's goat or b) not posting on the wiki.
To those of you who think teaching the languages is so much easier than just about anything else, clearly you have never taught elementary Greek/Latin.
I have taught elementary Greek/Latin, and it is easier than any classical civ or ancient history course I've taught. And if it's so hard, why do most graduate programs have lowly grad students teaching elementary Latin, and some let them teach elementary Greek? Hmmm?
I agree with the long post above: be a part of the discipline or don't. I'm an historian who knows and teaches the languages, and I would say the same to those ancient history PhDs who don't know the languages and get their "primary sources" from translations.
Granted that introductory language teaching takes more work than intermediate or senior level.
But...
if you shudder at the thought of explaining a paragraph of Plato to intermediate Greek students, just try explaining accents to a clueless intro Greek class. Unless you know Greek EXTREMELY well (and that rules out quite a few lit. folks and all but the best of clarchs), you're in for a semester of heavy drinking and valium-popping
Look, any adequately trained literary classicist can teach beginning Greek without it becoming an ordeal, and a good number of archaeologists can, too. It's true that teaching accents might be hard if you don't yourself have a full grasp of accentuation, but in that case the thing to do would be to sit down for an hour with a book and re-learn accentuation, not throw oneself into an alcoholic haze for the semester.
Clarchs, we're obviously talking to the crew of the Titanic. The ship will sink before the traditionalists see where classics is headed. Don't think that these ignorant comments are from the boomer generation. These are younger people who are clones of their evil villain advisors. They will carry on the tradition. For the record, I'm a clarch who found a wonderful TT home in a history department and I couldn't be happier. I would much rather teach the history of western civ than another day of "easier" Latin. For one, you are educating the mainstream world, not a dying demographic. Really, look at history departments and maybe classics departments in Canada.
And if it's so hard, why do most graduate programs have lowly grad students teaching elementary Latin, and some let them teach elementary Greek?
My grad program only allowed the senior Hellenist grad student to teach beginning Greek. There are tenured faculty who shouldn't step foot near a beginning Greek class. Truth is, while we can put anyone with adequate training into the elementary classroom, we then produce mediocre students. Those who know the material best should teach the elementary sequence if we want to have intermediate and advanced students worth bothering with. ClArchs should teach intermediate. Grad students should teach intermediate. Elementary should be for people with skillz.
For one, you are educating the mainstream world, not a dying demographic.
And that ignorance is why Classics should never hire anyone like you. If you'd ever set foot in a Classics dept you would see that for the most part we teach the same undergrads you do, just like everyf*)!ingone else. Stop pretending your teenage fantasy good vs. evil view of the world exists outside your muddled (muddy from the digging?) head. We welcome Clarchs, just not juvenile ones like you.
Truth is, while we can put anyone with adequate training into the elementary classroom, we then produce mediocre students. Those who know the material best should teach the elementary sequence if we want to have intermediate and advanced students worth bothering with. ClArchs should teach intermediate. Grad students should teach intermediate. Elementary should be for people with skillz.
Hooray for sense!
There are tenured faculty who shouldn't step foot near a beginning Greek class.
Sure. Of course, there are tenured faculty who shouldn't set foot in any class.
I think the issue with beginning languages isn't so much depth of one's understanding of the language—although obviously one should know it—but pedagogical technique. This is why some people with profound knowledge of Greek can be very ineffective teachers of it, and why a grad student (provided adequate knowledge of Greek) who is an instinctively good teacher can be very effective.
when Classics finally dies from its own myopia, maybe the people who killed it will feel some regret - but probably not, as they are generally too self-absorbed.
Why should they care? They're pulling in six figures and are in their little ivory tower. As long as they're not the ones in charge when the music stops, they can pretend like they still rule the world when in fact Mehmed is at the gates.
I didn't realize December 14 was Bitter Rambling Day.
The music won't stop. The music has played for 2,000 years or more, and it's got enough momentum to play for at least 2000 more years. classicists' whining is the last thing that'll drown it
Tell that to the Assyriologist down the hall from me who's teaching "the land of Abraham" for the 50th time. Have fun teaching "the land of Homer" in 20 years. You'll be begging to teach your diss topic of "the left scrotum of Homer" and deans will laugh at you.
Clarchs, we're obviously talking to the crew of the Titanic. The ship will sink before the traditionalists see where classics is headed.
Clarchs are the only salvation of the field?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
(For the record, I'm no traditionalist. But the sheer arrogance of such a statement...)
I didn't realize December 14 was Bitter Rambling Day.
lol
Actually, it's not just today. Bitter Rambling is the traditional festival of our people, and is celebrated continuously from November to May.
"the left scrotum of Homer"
Holy shit!!! How many scrotums did Homer have?!?
I guess I really haven't been keeping abreast of the latest research.
What do you expect, evil villains, when you keep on sticking your 11 interviews in front of everyone's faces?
If I had multiple scrota I think I'd get more interviews.
If I had multiple scrota I think I'd get more interviews.
Well, you could just float a rumor. They usually don't bother to visually verify your scrotum count in the interviews, anyway. That comes during the campus visit. For that, you could probably try some kind of prosthesis.
I think the frothing 'clarch' is actually an evil villain philologist trying to give good clarchs a bad name. Don't you have a hundred interviews to prepare for, evil villain philologist? Or have you worked out it's better to psych us out? Hey, I read FV and the Wiki. I'm pretty psyched out already.
I really, really, really chose the wrong field (and year to quit drinking).
We get it, you're evil, have a dozen interviews, hate archaeologists, and will ream every junior faculty member once you become senior...and there's nothing anyone can do about it as a dozen schools will fall over themselves offering you a job this year. We GET IT. It's your world and there's nothing we can do about it.
(For the record, I'm no traditionalist. But the sheer arrogance of such a statement...)
Hey! I thought I was the only one left! There's another?!?
We need to come up with a secret sign so that we can recognize each other at the conference. (Or perhaps something less subtle: I'll be the one standing over the still-warm corpse of a literary theorist, casting my eyes about in search of a place to hide the gun.)
If you're the opposite gender from me we should probably try to mate and preserve our race, and thus the field of classical studies.
Look, if the "I have 11 interviews" person actually exists, of which I'm not persuaded, consider these two things:
1). if you could have those 11 interviews, but would have to live every moment of the rest of your life as the shriveled and petty little soul who would enjoy posting taunts like that, would you do it?
2). if that person were to come for a campus visit to my department, we would notice that they were a total dick, and we wouldn't hire them, because we don't want to have a total dick around for the next forty years. That's not to say that being a total dick is an obstacle to employment everywhere (obviously) but that it can be a very serious disadvantage at some institutions. And if a total dick thinks people who aren't dicks won't notice that he's a dick... well, what else would you expect a total dick to think?
I hope you're right, but I'm sure the people at Texas many years ago didn't think, "This sabre-tooth kitten is a total dick, but let's hire him anyway." The cynical side of me thinks that many dicks have been hired in the past and this villain will be the latest in a long line.
If you're the opposite gender from me we should probably try to mate and preserve our race, and thus the field of classical studies.
Well, do you have scrota? If so, we're good to go. I'll look for the trail of literary theorist blood in Philly - you can always tell, cause they have especially thin and flimsy blood, much like their scholarship.
Who knew FV might become a hook-up site?
No, don't get me wrong, if somebody has 10+ interviews, they'll probably get a job out of it. But if somebody is a dick, there will also be jobs that they don't get purely because they're a dick. Being a dick is always a disadvantage.
All this talk of dicks, blood, and scrota has left me feeling a little off. Oh well, I suppose it's good practice for the APA.
A grasshopper asks, is FV normally this full of testosterone? Things seem a bit lopsided demographically speaking.
All the women I know in the field aren't stupid, inane, and belligerent enough to waste their time on this crap. I, however, am precisely that stupid, inane, and belligerent. I hate myself.
O Snotty 80's Movie Villian, may I ask whether you honestly think that
(a) you're the only one who has multiple APA interviews,
(b) we are any more academically qualified for these positions than 3/4 of the people who applied for them, or
(c) that anyone gives a flying fuck?
For Chrissakes. Grow up, dumbass.
Really, the only people to blame for the, um, musky atmosphere in here are the guy who was acting like a total dick and the other guy who advanced in passing his bold and counterintuitive theory of a polyscrotal Homer.
Presumably, neither of those things is a daily occurrence. Especially the latter.
FV is so less civilized this year...grow up, people.
He must be doing something right to have 11 interviews. Maybe I need to get some evil, sabre-tooth tiger, archaeology-hating into my temperament.
Well, a polyscrotal Homer, if provable, would certainly lay to rest the theory that Homer was a woman. Unless, of course, H. was actually hermaphroditic. A thesis yet to be written, I believe. APA monograph series, look out.
So how does one get 11 interviews? Rocking reference letters? Slick cover letter? Oxbridge book accepted? Princeford degree?
I'm assuming it's a combination of factors, but I'm wondering if there's a contant silver bullet from year to year that produces these double-digit interview invites.
If he exists, the comical villain is not getting interviews because he is evil. He is getting them for reasons completely unrelated to his moral character. Both good and wicked people can get lots of interviews. I know personally a number of people who have had 10+ interviews. None of them is wicked, and none of them would ever caper around bragging about their interview count.
Incidentally, the number of interviews you can get does not necessarily have an impact on whether you actually get campus invites and, eventually, a job offer. I know several people who have had 10+ interviews and failed to get a job out of them. I also know someone who had two interviews, and got one of those jobs.
So how does one get 11 interviews? Rocking reference letters? Slick cover letter? Oxbridge book accepted? Princeford degree?
Well, first, you have to apply for at least 11 positions.
After that, it's basically a combination of 1). field—is there a lot of hiring in what you do going on? 2). Ph.D. granting institution—you can see who the most successful institutions are over on the "past outcomes" thread and 3). interest of research—so, it's possible to work in a hiring field, and come from one of the elite schools, but have research that few SCs find appealing and thus not get many interviews.
Also, luck matters. Maybe this year there aren't many other candidates from the elite schools who work on what you do, but next year maybe there will be a bunch. That could have a significant effect on how many interviews one gets.
And, finally, the more jobs there are, the better your chances of getting interviewed for a lot of them. So, this year: not so much.
Has anyone heard ANYTHING from Gettusburg? It was the earliest deadline this year, so I was expecting them to decide on interviews fairly early on as well.
Re: the pedagogy thread
I am in a small program at a large university. I teach first- and second-year Greek every year. I assure you: if you want elementary languages to be an easy assignment, they will be. If you want to try to develop your pedagogy skills, to try to teach students to read the languages and not just memorize paradigms and vocabulary, it is a difficult assignment. Most of the philologists on FV and probably most of the Clarchs too sailed through their language classes because they were good at languages. How many languages does each of us speak or at least read? At least five. But try to work with students without our educational background and native talent. It takes individual attention to each student, careful consideration of each mistake, comments on every night's homework assignment, and so on. It is an arduous task, but can be done.
Why do the big graduate programs let their least experienced teachers (grad students) teach elementary Latin? Because they don't really care about teaching all students. They care about their language majors, whom they will groom for grad school, i.e. those who have the native talent and educational background most of us have. If none of other students get out of the language-requirement sequence, great! Fewer students to get in the way when they teach the "serious" students. Pay attention to how much care the "important" programs give to helping Classics majors find careers other than Classics grad programs.
My advice to all of you: never talk about elementary language courses in an interview as a blow-off course in which you can glance over a paragraph of Plato or Cicero and go into the classroom. It's a sign of laziness. That might work for the "important" programs. But for the rest of us--who will be hiring most of you and who live in the real world of teaching the languages to non-elite students every day... for the rest of us, put some real thought into the challenges of elementary language teaching. Read LaFleur's "Latin for the 21st Century" and the pedagogy articles published in Classical Journal and elsewhere. Think about what pedagogy skills you have and what you still need to develop. SCs will care about your research. You do need to be publishable so you can be tenured. But many, many schools need excellent teachers in their lower-level courses to keep enrollments healthy enough for our programs to survive. Even if we teach 250 people in myth, the dean still looks at the enrollment in language courses.
So how does one get 11 interviews? Rocking reference letters? Slick cover letter? Oxbridge book accepted? Princeford degree?
Beyond the factors already mentioned, having your PhD in hand by the time you apply will dramatically improve your chances. Most SC will consider ABDs, but some of them will not look at them unless they are not completely satisfied with the applicants who already have their PhD.
Has anyone heard ANYTHING from Gettusburg? It was the earliest deadline this year, so I was expecting them to decide on interviews fairly early on as well.
Me, too, but no, nothing. They do have two positions to make up interview lists for. They're actually very close to my dream job, so I'm very nervous. Glad someone's nervous with me.
I didn't apply, but I'm curious. As someone who's never spent any significant time in PA, what makes Gettysburg so ideal?
"Why do the big graduate programs let their least experienced teachers (grad students) teach elementary Latin? Because they don't really care about teaching all students."
Well, it's not as though they're giving out enough tenure lines to support the elementary language programs. So, it's grad students or lecturers. And if your department prefers not to get into the two-tier tenure-track/lecturer system, then it's grad students or no one.
And grad students have to teach someone in order to learn how to teach. We can't have them teach our grad courses or our senior level courses, and there aren't enough intermediate courses to ensure that all our graduate students get to teach the languages. So where, pray tell, are they supposed to go but to the beginning language classes?
And I would add that some of the best and most inspiring teachers I have ever observed were graduate students teaching beginning languages. A graduate student with life in their veins is a Hell of a lot better than some tenured Ph.D. who doesn't give a shit, and because they're not jaded yet they might actually bust their ass to make sure "all students" learn. And a good natural teacher teaching for the first time is better than some old lump teaching something for the twentieth time. I mean, Hell, I got into Classics in the first place because of a Latin T.A. I had at a state school back in the day.
I didn't apply, but I'm curious. As someone who's never spent any significant time in PA, what makes Gettysburg so ideal?
It's much nearer home than where I teach now, and it's an excellent SLAC, exactly the kind of place where I want to end up.
I didn't apply, but I'm curious. As someone who's never spent any significant time in PA, what makes Gettysburg so ideal?
The Land of Little Horses.
Everyone just wants a Gettysburg address...
The Land of Little Horses.
Awwww. They're so little!
The Land of Little Horses.
Hey! I know who you are!
Get back to work!
Get back to work!
... And that concludes a day of 60+ posts.
"1). if you could have those 11 interviews, but would have to live every moment of the rest of your life as the shriveled and petty little soul who would enjoy posting taunts like that, would you do it?"
When kibble starts to look like a luxury, I'm ashamed to say that evil doesn't look so bad if it means I might actually land a job.
I can do evil. I'll eat one of those little horses just to prove it. Just give me a goddamn interview.
If you eat the evil villain, I'm sure the schools that have extended him an interview would gladly give them to you. Just make sure to watch out for the sabre teeth when chomping down.
A question.
Is the wiki for teaching jobs only? Princeton is looking for a Classics librarian.
I just noticed on the wiki a position at Oberlin which was not advertised through the APA. Did it come from WCC? Can we expect to hear about it today-ish from the APA? Could someone please post the details?
If it was previously announced, I can't believe it flew under my radar.
The Oberlin position was advertised today in the Chronicle; the deadline is Feb. 15:
http://chronicle.com/jobs/id.php?id=0000586315-01
Given the slow speed of the APA, it's not a bad idea to periodically check H-Net, the Chronicle of Higher Education and the Classical Association of Canada (if you're so inclined).
At the risk of reviving the sport of UT-bashing and encouraging another round of feline metaphors: folks should keep in mind that this site is called FAMAE VOLENT for a reason. I think it's a great thing and wish it had been around when I finished my PhD. But, in the end, it's a lot of rumors--some with a bit of truth to them, but also with some significant distortions of fact. For reasons of confidentiality, I can't debunk specific claims point by point (e.g. what UT is looking for in these hires, the departmental culture). I simply encourage shortlisted candidates to take the things that are said here with a few pounds of salt.
There are some specific things that can, however, be addressed. First of all, we are not "looking for" anything specific. One of the great things about our current make-up is that we can afford to look at smart, interesting candidates in a wide range of areas (it also meant that we cut many, many very strong applicants from our list). However, a successful candidate will need to be able to teach language courses at all levels (not necessarily both languages). As was noted, the relatively large proportion of MC colleagues, combined with the fact that the literary people in the department do about 50% of their teaching in civ/lit in trans. courses, means that we have had a lot of difficulty staffing language courses in recent years. This is *not* because MC colleagues have openly refused to teach language courses. In fact, one colleague is stepping into the breach in the spring to cover a beginning language course. But it does mean that we need to hire colleagues who are most comfortable doing at least 50% of their teaching in language courses, esp. advanced ugrad and grad courses.
It would also be a mistake to assume that old, male faculty member at UT=evil sabre-tooth tiger. In fact, the majority of my older, male colleagues are sweet, purring kittens. And, frankly, the so-called sabre-tooth tigers are a lot of roaring, not a lot of bite these days. They like people to think they can bite 'cause that gives them a power that they don't actually have. It's not 1985 anymore....
And, finally, a tip: the APA interviews will include a range of faculty, not just SC members, and including archaeologists. If you want to impress, be prepared to talk about your own work in a way that gets us excited (theory not necessary); be prepared to talk about what you could add to our department in terms of teaching and to the broader intellectual life. Be prepared to make connections between your research/teaching interests and those of current faculty. And, most importantly, make it clear to us that you'd be enthusiastic to join a department that is in the midst of reconfiguring itself and that you could contribute to that effort in meaningful and positive ways.
Best of luck to everyone with your job searches!
Well, do you have scrota? If so, we're good to go. I'll look for the trail of literary theorist blood in Philly - you can always tell, cause they have especially thin and flimsy blood, much like their scholarship.
Hmm. I think I'll quote William Hurt's character in "The Big Chill" and ask, "Did I ever tell you what happened to me in Vietnam?"
Personally, if I were standing over a literary theorist's corpse it wouldn't be blood anomalies that would intrigue me, but the brain: I have a theory that inside the cranium of these people who depend on spewing out trendy buzzwords and applying irrelevant scholarship from other fields to make names for themselves there is actually just a teensy little lemming brain, not the 3-lb. brain of a normal adult homo sapiens.
What has been said about UT is not groundless rumor. There are reasons why people leave and/or try to leave with such frequency. One of those reasons is the conduct of certain senior faculty, conduct rendered consequential by their ability to affect promotion to tenure and promotion of associates. Maybe it's not '85 any longer, but the characters in question are still very much present and able to put their thumbs on the scales of promotion. Knowing some of the people who are there, I would say that there is no doubt that, once the beasts have retired, UT will be a pleasant place. Until then, though, applicants should know that there are beasts on the prowl, and that there isn't really anything that the good elements can do (or are willing to do) to marginalize or eliminate them.
Departments need to know that there is a cost to their reputation for letting little tyrannies take root. It is a good and healthy incentive to prevent that from happening in the first place, and to face the problem head on when it already has.
I have a theory that inside the cranium of these people who depend on spewing out trendy buzzwords and applying irrelevant scholarship from other fields to make names for themselves there is actually just a teensy little lemming brain, not the 3-lb. brain of a normal adult homo sapiens.
Wow, we really do like to scapegoat, and I'm guessing it's not just that one dumb clarch. There aren't any theorists in Classics. Well, maybe, like, three. But seriously what the hell are you people so paranoid about? I'm not especially fanatical about literary theory so don't really care whether there are or aren't literary theorists, but fwiw there aren't any. Unless you think that New Criticism is literary theory. In which case god help you. Spend some time in CompLit or Anthro and then you'll see some pretty freaking astonishing bs (and lots and lots of really brilliant stuff too, of course, but what would be the fun in talking about that). But it's not in Classics now and to be honest I can't see it coming (for good or for ill). Bad scholarship, sure, there's a ton of that, but waves of literary theory, no. (Aren't we, like, post-post-theory anyway, whatever that means?). I'd be much more worried about crazy economists wanting to model the interpretation of texts on Chinese hydraulics and Inuit nomenclature. (Martingales and spectral orders - what the f&@# are they smoking?). Just kidding, economists are some of my best friends.
Re. "Job Search Updates"
A request submitted with all due respect.
Would it be possible to start separate threads on such topics as "theory-bashing", "UT-bashing", "Princeford-bashing", "<3 Tiger Tree Idolatry <3 ", and "Multiple Scrota"?
I came here looking for news about "job search updates" - didn't realize I'd need a winnowing fan.
Would it be possible to start separate threads on such topics as "theory-bashing", "UT-bashing", "Princeford-bashing", "<3 Tiger Tree Idolatry <3 ", and "Multiple Scrota"?
These things belong to Random Scuttlebutz (where they were until this thread was hijacked over the weekend).
I have a theory that inside the cranium of these people who depend on spewing out trendy buzzwords and applying irrelevant scholarship from other fields to make names for themselves there is actually just a teensy little lemming brain, not the 3-lb. brain of a normal adult homo sapiens.
Wow, we really do like to scapegoat, and I'm guessing it's not just that one dumb clarch. There aren't any theorists in Classics. Well, maybe, like, three. But seriously what the hell are you people so paranoid about? I'm not especially fanatical about literary theory so don't really care whether there are or aren't literary theorists, but fwiw there aren't any. Unless you think that New Criticism is literary theory. In which case god help you. Spend some time in CompLit or Anthro and then you'll see some pretty freaking astonishing bs (and lots and lots of really brilliant stuff too, of course, but what would be the fun in talking about that). But it's not in Classics now and to be honest I can't see it coming (for good or for ill). Bad scholarship, sure, there's a ton of that, but waves of literary theory, no. (Aren't we, like, post-post-theory anyway, whatever that means?). I'd be much more worried about crazy economists wanting to model the interpretation of texts on Chinese hydraulics and Inuit nomenclature. (Martingales and spectral orders - what the f&@# are they smoking?). Just kidding, economists are some of my best friends.
This is sophistry, if you're going to claim that there's little theory intruding into our field because what you consider "theory" is seldom found.
Personally, I think that Justice Potter Stewart's definition of pornography is far more applicable to "theory" than yours: "I know it when I see it."
And anyway, I'm not being paranoid; I'm being disdainful.
This is sophistry, if you're going to claim that there's little theory intruding into our field because what you consider "theory" is seldom found.
Alright, so look through the lit people at all the major universities and tell me how many of them are theorists. Maybe one per dept. on average. And I can barely think of more than a handful at Berkeley, Princeton, Stanford, Harvard, Yale, Michigan, Brown, Cornell, Duke, and Chicago all taken together. (And I actually dabble in lit theory, so I should know). Just because a tenure or hiring committee wants you to publish a theory article doesn't mean you have to take your insecurity out on the rest of us (disdain is carried off with more panache). If you're talking about theory in general and not literary theory, well, then 1) you're changing your tune and 2) your recalcitrance will screw you (and no, I don't necessarily think that's a good thing, because I favor diversity, but that's just the way things are for the most part).
Servius -
Here's an idea. Could we add a "Job Announcements" thread? This could be a place not for UT/Princeford/clarch/theory bashing, but for job announcements. Not the ones from the APA we all know about, but ones like the UNH one posted on this thread, or ones that aren't yet posted via the APA, but on the WCC list or the Chronicle. People are always asking about the jobs on the wiki not advertised via the APA (like Oberlin just now), so why not have a clearinghouse where people can post such ads or links to them?
(The only downside I can see is that once again this website will be doing the job of the Placement Service. But maybe this could be an example for them.)
Thanks,
a very grateful job seeker
Alright, so look through the lit people at all the major universities and tell me how many of them are theorists. Maybe one per dept. on average. And I can barely think of more than a handful at Berkeley, Princeton, Stanford, Harvard, Yale, Michigan, Brown, Cornell, Duke, and Chicago all taken together. (And I actually dabble in lit theory, so I should know). Just because a tenure or hiring committee wants you to publish a theory article doesn't mean you have to take your insecurity out on the rest of us (disdain is carried off with more panache). If you're talking about theory in general and not literary theory, well, then 1) you're changing your tune and 2) your recalcitrance will screw you (and no, I don't necessarily think that's a good thing, because I favor diversity, but that's just the way things are for the most part).
I can tell you do literary theory, because you have repeatedly read into a text things that were never in the author's mind, thus taking my written work and projecting onto it what you feel is to be found there rather than what was actually there.
Just to help you out a bit, there has never been an expectation from any hiring committee that I would one day write an article showing I know theory. So I have no insecurities in this area, despite your assumptions.
And, to be honest, I mentioned literary theorists in my original post because the joke worked better that way -- I could certainly have just gone with the more generic "theorist" and had it apply to other fields within the field of ancient studies, but that's not how the joke came into my head.
It must make you feel very insecure to be confronted by a writer who can tell you whether your, er, theories about his/her writing are correct, instead of being able to write any ol' thing about a writer who has been dead for 2000 or so years and therefore can't tell you how much more informative a traditional approach to his (or her, let's not forget Sappho) oeuvre would have been.
Dear Toothy,
I don't care that much about literary theory. I do care that you are both an ignorant bigot and in the same field as I am. That kind of sucks for me and everyone else. On the other hand I don't necessarily impugn your scholarship because I don't know you. I don't suppose you'd understand any of this. Not because you're not theoretically minded, but because you're an arrogant solipsist.
Love,
A surprisingly traditional classicist
Dear surprisingly traditional classicist,
You're in a fight with VDH. Why are you even bothering?
Affectionately,
A lemming
Tweeeeeeeeeeeet!
You, number 25, and you, number 14!!
Two-minute minors for roughing on you both. Go sit in the boxes and cool off!
This is a family establishment, keep it civil.
NERD FIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Life's hard enough without being compared to a theorist. Makes you want to head for the nearest cliff.
(I'M KIDDING)
So do we get a whole thread for trashing VDH? Awesome!
(I'M STILL KIDDING)
(Maybe)
Sorry to distract from the entertainment, but this is what I heard about the Princeton library job.
It's been available for a while. Probably because it requires qualifications in librarianship, classics, and languages inc. modern Greek. I'm guessing they might be flexible since these criteria are pretty hard to satisfy in one candidate.
Does anyone have any idea of the salary?
NERD FIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Flammae volent!
I'm guessing they might be flexible since these criteria are pretty hard to satisfy in one candidate.
I'm guessing you're right, but having done work-study in library administration during grad school, I'm also guessing that the one thing that isn't flexible is a degree in library science. (Which I am actually working on online as a back-up plan, but certainly wouldn't get done in time for the Princeton job.)
If you've got that, though, go for it. You should know that based on my experience one doesn't get very far into the top echelons of librarians without (sigh) a PhD.
So do we get a whole thread for trashing VDH? Awesome!
(I'M STILL KIDDING)
(Maybe)
No fair! If there's a VDH-bashing thread (and doesn't that go against the no-names policy?), can't we also bash his FBI informant nemesis?
"Flammae volent!"
-Genius!-
No fair! If there's a VDH-bashing thread (and doesn't that go against the no-names policy?), can't we also bash his FBI informant nemesis?
Well, since he's long since left Classics for punditry, I don't see any reason not to use his name. Plus, most discussion of him has revolved around his book.
As for the FBI informant, that was admittedly some impressive public buffoonery, but she just wasn't able to parlay that initial success into the sort of sustained career of public buffoonery that her antagonist attained. You can't take her shining moment away from her, but I'm afraid she wouldn't merit her own thread.
Speaking of librarians, there's been a lot of bashing of the placement service, but if you ask me -- which you haven't -- my life is much more adversely impacted by ill-informed decisions made by library personnel, including those who purport to have expertise in classics.
Perhaps we should have a thread for bashing them, too.
Perhaps everyone should get back to work. Not to spoil your fun, but we're going to hire those of you with near-completed dissertations and/or articles.
we're going to hire those of you with near-completed dissertations and/or articles
Well, I sympathize. I never found it harder to work than at this point in the application process. One thing it really wouldn't hurt to do right now, though, is to work on your job talks. If you have callbacks, they may occur pretty quickly after the AIA/APA, and after the conference you're going to be pretty drained.
And if you have eleven interviews, you really should prepare eleven different job talks, because if word gets out that you're just repeating the same job talk for all eleven campus interviews you'll look pretty bad. So whoever you are, you should start now, and work on them right up to the day the conference begins.
And when you get those 11 job talks, don't add them to your CV as invited lectures. Like people can't figure out what you're doing.
They're not, you know, "Invited Lectures," but they are public lectures, and they count, and they go on your CV. After all, they're not graduate student conference talks or something; they're a real talk that takes places before a real audience that asks real questions.
So I've noticed that many schools have not extended interviews yet. Will there be a mad rush to contact candidates during the weeks leading up to Philadelphia? Do some schools, especially those with late deadlines, plan to contact people after the APA?
hi, Newb -
This year is rather unconventional, given the economy. Several schools may still be awaiting finalization on the budget. Thanksgiving was late too, and so SCs have undoubtedly been preoccupied with the demands of closing out the semester before sorting through some 90+ applications. I think you should expect to hear back from most places this week, though.
Good luck & don't panic!
Anyone know whether the Swarthmore position is a go? The posting (from back in September) referred to "a possible one-year leave-replacement opening," so I want to know whether it's still at least a possible opening before I take the time/money to send in my application. I've tried contacting them, but have heard nothing back.
Shouldn't the December issue of the APA/AIA placement bulletin have come by now? Or is that too much to hope for?
I think it's better if we don't get it as I'm sure it will list more cancellations than jobs.
Email from HR at St. Joseph's University indicating their search has been officially canceled.
It's strange that the news came from HR and not someone in the department.
My favorite part of the e-mail:
"We regret to inform you that the posting for Assistant Professor of Classics has been withdrawn, but we welcome you to apply for other positions within the university."
Really?
"We regret to inform you that the posting for Assistant Professor of Classics has been withdrawn, but we welcome you to apply for other positions within the university."
I found that very helpful, and have already submitted my application for Weekend Residence Hall Desk Attendant, 11pm to 7am.
If I can also find part-time work in the dining hall, then I can take home leftovers and avoid the cat-food diet. Back off all you Material Culture Types, this one's mine. Find your own non-academic positions.
What are you talking about, Tiger Tree? Those jobs are obviously ideal for MC types - they don't have to teach Latin or Greek.
(Kidding...)
Exactly! That's why I'm worried that all of them will apply for it. They'd also be especially qualified for it because it involves dealing with drunk undergrads at odd hours.
[ducks]
Just kidding!!
So has anyone heard what is up with Gettysburg - either the tenure track or the VAP? They seem to be taking their time.
Exactly! That's why I'm worried that all of them will apply for it. They'd also be especially qualified for it because it involves dealing with drunk undergrads at odd hours.
[ducks]
Just kidding!!
And don't forget the sex!
Still kidding...
"Exactly! That's why I'm worried that all of them will apply for it. They'd also be especially qualified for it because it involves dealing with drunk undergrads at odd hours."
Just thank your lucky stars that it's not at Princeford. You would have to deal with drunk undergrads at odd hours AND their rich fathers trying to cover it up.
[not ducking]
Some thoughts from a SC member, on a job that may (or may not) be listed on this wiki:
link
From the link left on this thread:
"Candidates - don't settle for portfolio services. Develop enough of a relationship with your recommenders that they at least tailor something to different types of schools. The all-purpose to whom it may concern recommendation really isn't inspiring me to want to interview you."
This is absurd. I applied to over 30 jobs last year. Some were SLACs, some R1s, a bunch in between. Any generic letter is just that, generic. I had four recommenders. They had other students and colleagues for whom they were writing letters. So according to the idiot at Hobart and William Smith these letter writers should have written a tailored letter for each job applied to by each of their advisees...
OK, let's imagine that each letter writer is writing for five job applicants. Let's further imagine that each applicant is applying to at least 20 jobs. So, at a busy time in the semester, these faculty members ought to write 100 personalized letters on behalf of their students, or at the very least 20 different generic letters? Furthermore, failure to do so is evidence for not having a close enough relationship with one's recommender?
Get real and get a clue, Cranky.
This "advice" really isn't inspiring me to take you seriously. When were you on the job market, 1968? Learn to read letters carefully, for what counts, and figure out how it applies to your position. Read the personal statement, which is the ONLY document that should be targeted to Hobart and William Smith, even more carefully. And don't take yourself so damn seriously.
The lake-effect snow up there must be smothering your common sense.
Cranky Supplicant is right. I have never been on a search committee that gave two shits whether letters of rec were tailored to our department. I have seen such letters, and they did their candidate no harm, but not a damned bit of good, either.
And it's a little late in the season to be giving advice about what applicants should demand from people writing their letters.
Never too late in the season for blogwhoring, however.
Re. Tailored Recs
Forget custom-tailored letters; I just want my advisers to give me feedback on my chapters! It's hard enough to get that.
With their concerns for their own scholarship, their own teaching loads, their own committee work, and their own grant applications, do advisers at most graduate programs have time (or interest) to write a series of specialized letters for their students? Of course they should, but between the ideal and the reality is their own workloads, interests and demands.
Again, let's be a little realistic.
If you have a letter-writer who goes out of his/ her way to write specialized letters for you, then you are extremely fortunate - and that's all it really is, the luck of having found a rare gem who cares enough and has the time to write for his/ her students. It doesn't even mean that you are a spectacular candidate - it simply means he/ she is a spectacular adviser.
For every post from a helpful senior scholar, we get one of these. I have no doubts that half the senior scholars out there would be TT-less if they hit the market now instead of 1972. There are probably half the jobs with double the applicants. I know so many friends who got TT jobs that were barely invited to the APA (usually much pleading from advisors and such was involved). This tells me that many people get shut out of interviews that could have exceled at a campus invite given the chance. Yet they never made it out of the gate. Can you say crapshoot?
It is completely absurd to expect faculty who teach in a flourishing graduate program to write individualized letters for each position each of the students they are supporting is seeking. This would mean dozens and dozens of different letters per year. But more than that, it's pointless. I could not care less whether Professor X was energetic enough to highlight all of the ways in which Applicant Y is a perfect fit for my department. Professor X doesn't work in my department (usually) and so doesn't know what a perfect fit for my department is.
I do care, however, if Professor X can give a helpful and intelligent assessment of the absolute value of the research of Applicant Y. Or if Professor X can vouch that Applicant Y can teach a class without driving every single student away from Classics forever. Happily, there is nothing institution-specific about these questions.
Well, gee, I hope this isn't the Hobart and William Smith classics search, or they'll just be interviewing the ABDs who decided to apply for a few jobs, knowing they still have graduate funding, and whose refs therefore have time to individualize letters.
I had refs send letters to institutions one year, my first year on the market, when I was studying in Europe and didn't yet have a dossier service. Most of them just changed the address for each school. So much for "personalized."
This is why you give your refs a list of the schools you're applying to, so that they can put in a good (and personalized) word for you should they feel so inclined.
The blog post does point out another problem though, having several candidates share one recommender. How to judge quality of candidates in such a situation is tough, but doesn't warrant throwing FV into a panic.
Oh, Great! All of us ancient historians who applied to the Hobart job have this guy sitting in judgment on our applications. Wonderful. Let me call my dissertation advisor and my readers up and see if they are willing to Fed-Ex a fruitcake to upstate New York in order to prove I have a good relationship with them.
Jumping Jesus on a pogo stick, this pisses me off. If I do get an APA with Hobart I am going to be tempted to sacrifice any shot at the job in order to turn the tables in the interview; complain that I don't have a monogrammed water cup, form-fitted chair, and personalized valet service to get me there.
The job market is hard enough, and then we get to deal with first-rate pompous asses like this.
I'm hoping that as the blog appears to be run by a medievalist (judging by other posts), and commented on by medievalists, it's not the classics search. But if it is, and the SC is reading this, you should really take into consideration what the extremely reasonable posts answering you say about this situation, and you should quit feeling insulted by impersonal letters.
On the other hand, must be nice to have a job where you have time to blog and all your colleagues have time to comment on your blog...
This is DEFINITELY the Ancient History position at HWS. Look at this guy's research interests: Greek and Roman Art, etc. The dept. is small and needs other members from outside to form a hiring committee. This guy is a natural choice given his interests. Oh, yes. This the Ancient History job. Yippppeeeee!
Golly...imagine the lucky interviewees at the APA who have to get through an interview with this guy and the lucky finalists who have to get through a campus visit with him!
Anyone who gets and interview and who cares to do a search around the HWS site given the clues "on leave," "medievalist," and "Greek and Roman Art" will quickly be able to put a name to this person. I should say, s/he looks just the sort of person who would write/believe such a thing, too.
Hopefully the actual Classics department is more reasonable.
This is DEFINITELY the Ancient History position at HWS. Look at this guy's research interests: Greek and Roman Art, etc. The dept. is small and needs other members from outside to form a hiring committee. This guy is a natural choice given his interests. Oh, yes. This the Ancient History job. Yippppeeeee!
I debated applying to that job (I'm on a multi-year contract so I could be picky) but didn't. I am kind of glad now even though all my letter writers did do personalized letters.
Golly...imagine the lucky interviewees
If they don't jump up and down and throw a fit like some of the commenters here, my hunch is that they'll be fine.
Keep it classy, people. A job search is as frustrating for SCs as it is for applicants.
Keep it classy, people. A job search is as frustrating for SCs as it is for applicants.
This is by far not our least classy discussion. I'd also point out that this guy chose to stir up trouble. His post was not helpful at all.
He's probably related to the person who keeps boasting about 11 interviews.
Keep it classy, people. A job search is as frustrating for SCs as it is for applicants.
Someone who has been around as long as that guy should know that letter writing is a time consuming venture and that it is nearly impossible for them to expect such personalization from advisors at large grad programs. Unless he hasn't been on a search committee for the last decade, he really should re-think his foolish advice. SCs can make things a lot harder on themselves by having attitudes like his.
Keep it classy, people. A job search is as frustrating for SCs as it is for applicants.
Ummmmmmmm... No. I respect the request to keep things classy. I in no way respect the statement that a job search is AS frustrating for SCs as it is for applicants. To assert something like this reveals a startling level of clueless-ness. THIS, among other things, makes the job search frustrating. Most SCs are great. Some, like the ones populated by you.... not so much.
If they don't jump up and down and throw a fit like some of the commenters here, my hunch is that they'll be fine.
Oh, wait. Do you work/blog for HWS, by any chance?
"another disappointed ancient historian said...
Anyone who gets and interview and who cares to do a search around the HWS site given the clues "on leave," "medievalist," and "Greek and Roman Art" will quickly be able to put a name to this person. I should say, s/he looks just the sort of person who would write/believe such a thing, too.
Hopefully the actual Classics department is more reasonable.
December 18, 2008 9:44 AM"
If you put your cursor over this person's picture on this person's personal web page, it says "The Cranky professor."
Following constructive criticisms, this grad student is prepared to rephrase what was said as:
Experience and observation suggest that a job search is time-consuming and at times frustrating for both job applicants and SCs. To determine who of SCs and job candidates experience more frustration and/or loss of time, more research is needed.
Someone who has been around as long as that guy should know that letter writing is a time consuming venture and that it is nearly impossible for them to expect such personalization from advisors at large grad programs.
He may feel this way because he probably does personalize his references for undergrads applying to grad school, but he has no clue what it's like to write letters for jobs.
This is not to justify him at all. It was a ridiculous comment that he made, and I think the criticism here is justified.
December ads are out - 5 of the first 7 listings are cancellations. (Which we already knew about, thanks to the wiki.)
I am currently sitting on a search committee I can attest that SCs can be extremely frustrating, but only because of the corruption, incompetence and insecurities of my colleagues.
For those many many Greek historians or prose people who applied for the Duke job, I just wanted to say that I know from a solid source that they are actually now focusing on a Latin prose person.
Here's a tip for those of you out on the job market:
foot rubs.
Back in the day, it was just common courtesy for recommenders to travel the country, massaging the barking dogs of our hard-working search committees. Some days, I'd have as many as three or four foot massages a day from solicitous and supportive recommenders!
Nowadays, I'm lucky if I get two or three footrubs out of an entire search! If you really want to make a good impression, tell your dissertation committee that you insist they get out there and start rubbing some feet. You'll be glad you did, and so will I.
I am currently sitting on a search committee I can attest that SCs can be extremely frustrating, but only because of the corruption, incompetence and insecurities of my colleagues.
That's exactly the point. If a search is hard on SCs, it's because they make it hard on themselves. Candidates can do that, too, but it'll be hard even if they don't.
If a search is hard on SCs, it's because they make it hard on themselves.
No matter how well-behaved a search committee is, it is hard to read and rank 50-100 files, read all of the additional materials from 10-15 interviewees, sit through the interviews, decide on 3-4 finalists, and read every word the finalists have ever written. In fact, the only way to make it easy is by being irresponsible: that is, by not actually reading anything.
For search committees, searches are not charged with fear and anxiety, and so in that sense they are not psychologically grueling for committee members, as by contrast they are for candidates. But responsible service on a search committee is a prodigious amount of work.
How can Tufts post a job ad with the APA on 12/18 with a deadline of 12/20? If Tufts is to blame, shame on them; if the wonderful APA Placement (Dis)Service is to blame, well then another point in favor of overhauling or scrapping entirely this increasingly useless service...
"For search committees, searches are not charged with fear and anxiety, and so in that sense they are not psychologically grueling for committee members, as by contrast they are for candidates."
While it is true that SCs do not suffer the same sort of fear and anxiety as candidates, it is unfair to underestimate the stakes of a search for some SCs. For some schools (especially smaller ones), a mishandled or unsuccessful search can set programs back years, if not permanently. The increasing corporatization of higher education and the casualization (not to mention exploitation) of the adjunct work force only increases the pressure on the SC to complete a search well (and right).
For those of us who take our responsibilities to the department, institution, and field seriously, the already considerable labor of filling a position is thus multiplied. We want to bring in a candidate who improves our department--both as a colleague and as an instructor--who will also be able to secure tenure at some point.
This situation is exacerbated as well for members of SCs who have lazy, irresponsible, or otherwise difficult committee members who derail or otherwise complicate the process.
As a previous candidate and now as a committee member I try to remind myself all the time that everyone involved is putting a considerable amount on the table. There are too few jobs and too many qualified people. I think it behooves all of us to remember that real human beings (with all the complexity and attendant anxieties involved) are on both sides.
As a former candidate who is a second-time SC member, I'm sorry, fellow SC members, but there's no comparison. Yes, being on an SC is a difficult job. But it's a job I'm paid to do, and do well. Candidates are facing a whole different ball game.
"There are too few jobs and too many qualified people."
So you have a margin of error and you know exactly what you're looking for. Candidates on the other hand have little margin of error. Some of us do not have the time and/or money to apply to 50 jobs, so we have to select carefully. On top of potentially spending hundreds of dollars to send reference letters and mail apps, we have high-and-mighty SC chairs being snooty about not have personalized rec letters with their names gilded. The job adverts are also notoriously ambiguous or even misleading.
So who has the tough task? Good grief - SC members, I know some of you were friends with Heinrich Schliemann, but please remember what it was like to be on the job market, and multiply that stress by 100x knowing that Dr. Bigshot advisor rarely makes a phone call (or sends a telegram) to plead your case these days to a Princeford chum.
Please leave the "ford" out of Princeford. We've already established that we're not the ones taking all the jobs.
Such pretense, we're talking about Samford University.
Yup, just for that, I hearby declare that the "ford" in Princeford refers now to Stanford, not Samford. Good job, Stanford affiliate.
My future. I see it!
Since I won't get a job this go-round I am going to start a lucrative business. It will be like Interfolio, only candidates can elect to send chocolates, fruit-baskets, foot-rubs and/or hookers to the search committees of their choice. I'll open franchises on every campus and recruit undergrads to perform all of the necessary services. Since tuition is rising, student loans and scholarships are falling, and SC members desperately need a little TLC, it will work beautifully.
I think I'll call it TreeLC: Tiger Balm for the Overemployed and Underextended. Look for my adds in next year's Chronicle of Higher Education.
But it's a job I'm paid to do, and do well.
Candidates are "paid" to seek employment, too. They seek the salary that they will make if they are successful in their search. The difference is that a candidate is not guaranteed earnings from the search, but a chance at earnings.
Candidates are facing a whole different ball game.
Candidates on the other hand have little margin of error.
Yes, this is why searches are psychologically taxing for candidates and not for committee members. In that important sense, they are not at all comparable experiences. I'm just saying that anyone who thinks that being on a search committee isn't a lot of work either 1). hasn't been on a search committee or 2). hasn't actually done their job correctly when they have been.
multiply that stress by 100x knowing that Dr. Bigshot advisor rarely makes a phone call (or sends a telegram) to plead your case these days to a Princeford chum.
So now we're lamenting the death of the Old Boys Network? I get so confused; the last I heard here, the network was going strong, and keeping qualified candidates from being considered for jobs. I don't have an opinion on this, but surely both complaints can't be true?
All points about the duress candidates are under should not be minimized. The amount of time, money, and emotional investment that goes into applying for jobs in this field is paralleled by few professions.
All I meant in the earlier post is to emphasize that SC members are under duress as well. Yes, we get paid to do this, but at some institutions our already low pay is thus further devalued by the additional responsibilities.
The job process creates stress all around. I would not, for a minute, trade being a SC member for being a jobless candidate right now. But, from reading many of the comments on this blog, I think that the polarizing mentality has a tendency to deprive all of us of our complexity and humanity. There are real people on both sides of the table, and demonizing some can only make this process harder.
Coming from a situation where I am a graduate of a large state school and none of my advisors have Princeford next to their name, I welcome the demise of the ole boys network. This doesn't change the fact that many of the senior SC members out there on their thrones issuing criticisms from on high are products of this network (though they conveniently choose to forget this and redact history by believing it was surely 100% merit).
I am currently on the tenure-track and, although agnostic, thank The Goddess everyday for that. I landed this job in 2007. I have served on two search committees in my first two years since being on the other side of the fence. Yes, those duties take time away from research, teaching, etc. They are onerous. They are, at the same time, interesting and informative. It is incredibly humbling and rewarding to meet our candidates, both at the APA stage and at the campus-visit stage. We made one awesome hire, and celebrated that. I expect we will make another one this year. It will be an achievement on our part, and an important thing to have done successfully.
All of that, however, pales in comparison to the task faced by our candidates. I know, I remember it well. All too fucking well.
We know it sucks. God, do we ever. Some of us still get the sweats whenever we walk into a semi-swank hotel room in a strange city. I will root against the San Diego Chargers for as long as I live.
Some SC members here are reasonably calling for a dial-back on the vitriol. That's cool. Many of us really do work our butts off in the search process, and we pray that you all will justify our time and energy. We are sure you will. If I could wave a magic wand and open up 30 FTEs at my institution just for those unlucky enough to have missed their chance this year I would.
Don't worry, most of us interviewing you well know that you are the ones in the much more difficult situation. You can mis-spell my name, include the name of a completely different school in your cover letter, and talk about our graduate students (we have none), but if you do interesting work and it shows, I'll take your application seriously. Don't sweat the small stuff.
I sent out over 50 applications 2 years ago. I had 15 APA interviews, 3 campus visits and one job offer. I was so confused by the time it ended I didn't know my own name, much less that of the hiring committee. Your studliness will shine through, so don't stress about the bullshit. Those of us who have recently gone through this grinder have got your back. We will fight the jerks who don't remember, and lay down some serious skin to make sure they don't disrespect you out of idiocy and a lacking of clues.
At this point I'd take a 50% pay cut and double my course load before going out on the market again. I'm already working like a beaten mule. Lord knows I'm one lucky motherfucking mule. I know it, you all know it, and even those who try to fashion false equivalencies about the two situations know it.
Being on an SC is difficult, and the stakes are high.
Being on the market is hell, and the stakes are astronomically higher.
Perfect example why every SC needs at least one or two people who've experienced the madness within the past several years. Thanks for that post - may you swiftly receive tenure and never forget.
The amount of time, money, and emotional investment that goes into applying for jobs in this field is paralleled by few professions.
I'm sorry, but the last bit here is total bullsh*t.
Try being someone who has to leave school to take care of a sick parent before they even get the bachelor's degree, spend 10+ years bouncing back from that only to find that you have too many accumulated obligations to even contemplate going to graduate school as you had once hoped. In fact, try being just about anyone else hunting for a blue or white color job right now. Sh*t, try being an English major hunting for a job in a world where 80% of those you meet think that majoring in anything in the Liberal Arts is a joke.
I now work at a major state university in a town where the state and its university are the major employers. I've worked here going on a decade. When I was applying for jobs with the state and the university, each application you sent in required a resume, reference letters and a 10 page application detailing every aspect of every job you had ever had...together with test scores, background check forms, security sensitive position forms, confidentiality waivers, and a hundred other little hurdles to be repeated with EACH application. I applied for 70+ jobs over a 6 month period with the university alone before I got my FIRST interview, all while living on a shoestring. By that time I had already applied for around a hundred jobs with the state with no luck at all...including a call back or even an acknowledgment letter. I had too much education for most jobs and not enough for the rest.
Please, Please, Please, the next time you walk by your department's secretary, don't think for a minute that it was any easier on the job market for her or him than it is for you being a Classics Ph.D. It is inane to think that the job market in Classics is unparalleled in it's rigor...inane and insulting.
"For those many many Greek historians or prose people who applied for the Duke job, I just wanted to say that I know from a solid source that they are actually now focusing on a Latin prose person."
This has been lost in the recent discussions about which side has it tougher, but this sucks. Since we're piling on just about every other demographic here, as a Greek historian, I'll be the first to pile on Latinists. Fucking boo hiss - Romanists are those cleaning up this year and yet ANOTHER job swings that way? I fucking blame the movie Alexander for being lame compared to Gladiator. C'mon fellow Hellenists, lets all pile on Colin Farrell also.
Anon. 3:47 -
Another Greek historian here. Whaddaya want to bet that Temple, which is interviewing both Roman historians and Greek prose people in Philadelphia, goes the Roman history route?
The point about it being tougher on blue collar workers is well taken. However, I don't think that's what the intial post was trying to say (let's be a little charitable on FV for once). I think they were suggesting (and forgive me if I have you wrong, intial poster) that a lot of Classics PhDs could have gone into a number of other lines of work where the gap between success and failure isn't quite so chasm-like. Bash on a Princeton PhD all you like (I'm not from there) but all of us have made a pretty strange commitment to do this. It's not charity work. It's not joining the army. They're better people. But it's sure as hell not IT, IB, or law. We all made a choice, sure, and the fact that we had a choice makes us more fortunate than 90% of people in this world, but that doesn't mean we get to ignore the small to medium injustices in our profession. On that seasonal eirenic note may I say that I will spend a few seconds each day appreciating the hard work of good SC members. Thank you. The rest of the time I'll be freaking out about my shit.
On that seasonal eirenic note may I say that I will spend a few seconds each day appreciating the hard work of good SC members. Thank you. The rest of the time I'll be freaking out about my shit.
Yes, as one of those emphasizing above the burdens of SC work, I think this is about the right formula. Actually, I think it's mainly useful: at the conference, your interaction with a search committee will probably be more positive if you remember that they're pretty tired. Not as tired as you are, but pretty tired.
Also, as with any population, some SC members can be complete shits. That's worth keeping in mind, too. No need to remember these folks in your prayers.
Since I won't get a job this go-round I am going to start a lucrative business. It will be like Interfolio, only candidates can elect to send chocolates, fruit-baskets, foot-rubs and/or hookers to the search committees of their choice. I'll open franchises on every campus and recruit undergrads to perform all of the necessary services. Since tuition is rising, student loans and scholarships are falling, and SC members desperately need a little TLC, it will work beautifully.
I think I'll call it TreeLC: Tiger Balm for the Overemployed and Underextended. Look for my adds in next year's Chronicle of Higher Education.
Want an investor? I'm in!
Perhaps it's implicit in your term "hookers," but I think many of these senior SC members are in need of a good eromenos. Hell, we could kill two birds with one stone if some candidates are game.
It will be like Interfolio, only candidates can elect to send chocolates, fruit-baskets, foot-rubs and/or hookers to the search committees of their choice.
Plus, unemployed Classics Ph.D.s are an obvious source of labor for the delivery, massage, and hooker positions.
It wouldn't really be that different from being on the job market, plus you'd be picking up some change.
It wouldn't really be that different from being on the job market, plus you'd be picking up some change.
And networking at the same time!
Ancient gay sex rawks! I always knew it would come back to this.
There is nothing ancient about this sex unless you're referring to perhaps the erastes.
And someone told us to keep this blog classy...
Didn't we have ancient gay sex rawks last year? We're classicists; we must maintain traditions!
I don't resent being called gay, but I draw the line at ancient.
It will be like Interfolio, only candidates can elect to send chocolates, fruit-baskets, foot-rubs and/or hookers to the search committees of their choice.
Can I open up a departmental account with you? We have an account with this service currently, but would appreciate the opportunity to expand our horizons into the grad and undergrad environment. Please contact our departmental secretary for payment options. Cheers!
It's good to see that the Princeford moniker has been finally accepted with open arms.
Let's go baby! Get me two journal articles a year, two monographs in the first six years and I'm all yours!
It's true that searches are much harder on candidates than on SC members, but there is also the old cliche that you never really know your colleagues until you do a search together, and for some people this can be very traumatic, and what had seemed like a wonderful job can start to seem like a fate worse than kibble.
I have a quote on my monitor:
"At least I'm not being eaten by a bear."
Lemony Snicket
Thus quotes one of the pups:
""At least I'm not being eaten by a bear."
Lemony Snicket"
In the hopes of restoring -- no, INITIATING -- some level of cultural literacy on this blog, I say that a number of you should
EXIT, PURSUED BY A BEAR
A special prize to the first person to locate that reference.
While I'm here, some of you are perilously close to identifying yourselves to the responsible search committee members who take the time to study and think about their candidates' records (yes, this whole set up can backfire on anonymous bloggers!!). And the comments that make me, and perhaps others, suspect your identities aren't ones that will help you. And thus, given the uncertainties, there might be collateral damage. I see we've now entered "fixed search" mode over 3 weeks before the convention occurs.
So maybe those who are eternally in attack mode might want to scale back the rhetoric on behalf of the innocent?
Yours truly, with hugs and kisses to all who don't post paranoid, clueless and salacious messages about searches,
The Bear
"I saw a bear writing at my desk."
Yes, a blog really isn't a blog unless everyone knows their Shakespearean stage directions.
[presses publish, eyes rolling]
Wasn't that 'exit, pursued by a bear' from the Callisto story in Ovid? - Poldy
We'll all send you ten bucks, a hooker, and an eromenos if you can identify the Princeford villain who probably has twenty interveiws by now and kick him in the ass for us.
If there's a search committee out there that is seriously considering the hilariously unprofessional course of allowing its hiring decisions to be influenced by its suspicions about the authorship of anonymous blog comments, it's worth pointing out that that committee in turn will be easily identifiable by sight at the convention: they'll be the ones all wearing clown shoes.
And possibly bear costumes, I suppose.
Yeah, and all the SC members are straight-laced saints. It must be the students who are getting hammered at the hotel bar each year talking smack about their colleagues and administrators. Give me a break - the things said on here are just to blow off some steam and don't make one blush nearly as much as some of the mysogynistic and racist comments I've heard coming out of waspy classicists.
No, no. Senior classicists at the APA don't get blind drunk, grope the ficus plants in the bar, and barf in the lobby.
Instead, they allude to Shakespearean stage directions and chuckle urbanely to each other. The whole time. I'm not even lying.
While I'm here, some of you are perilously close to identifying yourselves to the responsible search committee members who take the time to study and think about their candidates' records (yes, this whole set up can backfire on anonymous bloggers!!). And the comments that make me, and perhaps others, suspect your identities aren't ones that will help you. And thus, given the uncertainties, there might be collateral damage. I see we've now entered "fixed search" mode over 3 weeks before the convention occurs.
Here I was the whole time thinking that it isn't my identity that will help me, but my writing sample.
Crud!
"For those many many Greek historians or prose people who applied for the Duke job, I just wanted to say that I know from a solid source that they are actually now focusing on a Latin prose person."
This has been lost in the recent discussions about which side has it tougher, but this sucks. Since we're piling on just about every other demographic here, as a Greek historian, I'll be the first to pile on Latinists. Fucking boo hiss - Romanists are those cleaning up this year and yet ANOTHER job swings that way? I fucking blame the movie Alexander for being lame compared to Gladiator. C'mon fellow Hellenists, lets all pile on Colin Farrell also.
It's simple, really -- the department has far greater need for the Latinist, so their focus makes sense. Plus there's the added bonus of not risking hiring the pottymouth who wrote this post.
Can somebody please explain to me how His Bearness translated a conversation that roughly said "SCers who expect personalized and scented letters from applicants are douchebags" into "that search is fixed"? I know translation is interpretation, but that just seems off the wall.
Maybe this is another example of an SC member trying to give useful advice but instead revealing a tragic incapacity to read simple English?
Can somebody please explain to me how His Bearness translated a conversation that roughly said "SCers who expect personalized and scented letters from applicants are douchebags" into "that search is fixed"? I know translation is interpretation, but that just seems off the wall.
I assumed that that was about the "Duke has its eyes on a Latinist" comment, not the responses to the "tell your recommenders to pucker up and kiss my ass" comment.
I'm actually a little embarrassed by the conduct of some search committee members here, both the guy demanding fruit baskets and foot-rubs and the one waving his Winter's Tale around. If they're not the same person, which they may be, because they seem to subscribe to the same frilled lizard school of human interaction, whose doctrines can be succinctly described as "OOH LOOK AT ME I'M SCARY AND BIG RUN AWAY RUN AWAY RUN AWAY!!!"
So Hobart's Dr. Crankypants has grabbed his +3 Shovel of Supreme Superciliousness and decided to dig some more. His latest and greatest:
"Well, don't say that all professors are too burdened to write individual letters - that I can't get what I want. I spent much of today (Thursday) reading folders (and more! more files being completed by late arriving items!) and came across a nice example of what I would like to have seen more of. Distinguished professor of this'n'that has written recs for 4 out of the 63 candidates I've reviewed; the most recent folder from one of that professor's students had two letters via Interfolio (both boilerplated with greatness). Then came a letter from a department person where the candidate is currently teaching; the recommender visited every class taught there (ooh - we're a teaching-centered liberal arts college, too!). Finally, one letter came from the distinguished professor of this'n'that on stationary with colored letterhead. Colored ink signature. Aimed not just at the liberal arts market as opposed to R1s, but actually mentions our name twice (second occurrence in a locally acceptable short version). Does the candidate make the cut for a conference interview? Well, I have to say that if the candidate makes the cut, it is because the candidate is answering the advertisement (see earlier advice), meets the stated criteria, AND has 2 excellent recommendations pointed to our needs, not just the needs of every active search committee on the market. By the way, the distinguished professor of this'n'that's other 3 letters? Via Interfolio. So ask - perhaps you will receive."
Awesome. Trotting out the old Argument From Marginal Cases in defense of Foolish and Haughty Demands. We have a winner!
I can't wait to interview with this guy in Philly. 'Cause I know my advisor wrote a seriously awesome, targeted letter that mentions Dr. Crankypants' favorite flavor of sorbet. I'm so in like Flynn.
BTW you are not a Duke SC member by any chance? You seem paranoid about people suspecting an insider Latinist candidate. Lo and behold, I look at the Duke Classics faculty list and 3/4 VAPs are Latinists. I'm sure the search will be on the up and up and in the end you will offer the job to one of these VAPs. There's nothing wrong with that, since you've had a chance to "test ride" the soon-to-be-TT Latinist, but I REALLY wish departments didn't have to go through the motions if they're 90% sure they have their (wo)man. Just hire the person, save yourself the money and headaches of a search, and we all win.
For what it's worth, normal, sane search committees assign research and teaching a massive amount of importance, and don't really care at all about individually composed letters signed with sparkle ink and sealed with pony stickers.
Of course, every once in a while you'll run across a committee that just really, really likes pony stickers.
If one of the three Latinist VAPs at Duke is from Princeford, my bet is on this person. Anyone want to bet a drink at the APA? I'll be the one sitting at the bar with Puck Frinceford shirt on.
Crap, anon 1:51, now you've done it. We're going to hear about how lucky the interviewees are for getting practice and how they should kiss the feet of all the people involved for the privilege. This is like groundhog day ca. 2007.
We're going to hear about how lucky the interviewees are for getting practice and how they should kiss the feet of all the people involved for the privilege.
No, really it's that the costs of having a search fail are too great. Even if a department has a VAP that it thinks would be just the neatest t-t hire ever and wants to be BFF, it needs to have other candidates in case that VAP gets a more appealing job, because if the search fails they might lose the tenure line. And it is most definitely in the interest of job seekers to be interviewed even under these circumstance, since sometimes people do in fact decide they don't want to stay on, and the department decides that it would like to be BFF with you, instead.
I think you people need to stop being so paranoid abt the Princefords. I would defend most Stanford people as not being as successful as we said. I know a Hellenist who had over a dozen interviews last year who was not a Princeford person so let's just calm down with the defeatist rhetoric. AND NO I am not from either of those institutions... though, err, I wish I were since I would have more interviews...
Duke interview announcements should be going out soon, and all of the candidates are not senior. Good luck Latinists for this choice job.
Anyone heard from Oklahoma? Are they going for a senior person? I mean from the job description I wonder if Ellen Greene is leaving and if they are trying to replace her with a senior person esp since we have only had rejections AND by snail mail. One would think that if they are actually looking for a young person that they would have sent out some interview requests... though they could be in round two if they actually do rounds!
Has anyone heard anything about the search at Washington U - St Louis? I heard they did some interviews with religion people on the first weekend of November at their conference, which means the committee looked at dossiers back in October.
I think you people need to stop being so paranoid abt the Princefords.
Agreed. The constant jealousy is getting very very old and increasingly hurtful. Our colleagues don't deserve this sort of abuse. Moreover, hurling insults isn't going to rectify the situation, however real or imagined the gap between "princes" and hoi polloi.
Rather than reopen old wounds further, a non-Thersitean thought for those angered at the unfairness of it all: You only need one job offer. For all the poly-interview-istic folks there are plenty more (in my experience) who had 1 or 2 interviews at APA and ended up with the job. It may have been because they were a better fit at each of these institutions; perhaps they had the advantage of focusing their full attention on just that specific school. Who knows? But at the end they had good TT jobs where other more sparkly candidates (i mean figuratively, not involving actual sparkles) were 2nd in line for multiple jobs and ended up on the job market multiple times after that. best of luck to everyone in this rather depressing job year.
Seconded. This is getting rather ridiculous. I know Princeford stands in for a perceived "first rank" of graduate programs, but when it comes to the market this is largely BS. People get jobs coming from all programs. Crucially, many people coming out of the so-called Princeford programs don't get jobs at all. This is a tough process for everybody, so please, let's put away the pitchforks.
AND NO I am not from either of those institutions... though, err, I wish I were since I would have more interviews...
Please see the "past performance" thread for a more realistic assessment of which institutions regularly have the strongest performance on the job market. This "Princeford" business is an immense distortion.
If I were on a search committee, I'd be sorely tempted to hire interview Princeton and Stanford grads, knowing they are the only ones who couldn't be behind these idiotic "Princeford" posts we've been subjected to for the last month or so.
Grow up, people.
Give me a @#$% break. It's obvious that most of the posts defending Princeford with monikers such as "Ph.D. from lesser institution" are from Princeford affiliates. Who the hell would say "lesser?" Get off your @#!$% high horses. There's a reason why people want to call your Dr. Charles Emerson Winchester III, and it really shows from these posts. You make yourself an elitist bed, you get to lie in it.
Does anyone have a spare pacifier? Anon 1:40 seems to have lost his and is going into meltdown mode. Cheerios also work fairly well.
Does anyone have a spare pacifier? Anon 1:40 seems to have lost his and is going into meltdown mode. Cheerios also work fairly well.
Too bad they took all that children's decongestant off the market. That would calm Anon 1:40 and everyone else down for the whole night.
It's obvious that most of the posts defending Princeford with monikers such as "Ph.D. from lesser institution" are from Princeford affiliates.
That's true as far as it goes, but you forget to spell out the role of the space aliens in all of this. They are, in a sense, the crucial link that pulls all of this together.
Seriously, man. Just go over to the "past performance" thread, look around, and come back and tell us that Princeton and Stanford are consistently superior in terms of placement. The largest number of positions two years ago was had by Berkeley, and last year by Michigan. There is a pool of about eight schools that consistently have very strong placement, plus a number of others that have good placement. Stop freaking out, and go look at the numbers.
On the other hand, if you find it personally more satisfying to blame two schools in defiance of all evidence, go right ahead.
Anyone know what's up with Northwestern's Romanist search? According to the wiki, someone senior got a rejection weeks ago, and nothing since...
"AND NO I am not from either of those institutions... though, err, I wish I were since I would have more interviews..."
That was an attempt at levity/humor/a joke! God, you people really need to lighten up. Shit, I have a family, and my wife has a good job and all this crap is immensely stressful but let's all calm down. We have no control and that bites but it's a process.
Haven't some of you been on search committees? You know how difficult it is to wade through the pile of mind-numbingly similar dossiers... so and so is a genius in the vein of Wilamowitz, etc... and his research is ground breaking... he has quite a rapport with his students... blah blah... I would say half the dossiers look the same, etc... School rep is often a factor, but generally it seems they just want the person to be from one of the "Top" fifteen or so programs and not merely Princeford. But there are other factors... fit, connections (which are not all old boy network types since often faculty realize that they may be stuck with this person for twenty years), etc...
Anyone know what's up with Northwestern's Romanist search? According to the wiki, someone senior got a rejection weeks ago, and nothing since...
The Northwestern search was originally open rank but it has since been restricted to junior candidates only. This might be what the wiki entry refers to.
Amazing how often the default pronoun here is of the he/him/his group.
Eye-opening, in fact.
Amazing how often the default pronoun here is of the he/him/his group.
That's because we look good in a men's suit.
"I would like, in general, to treat people with much more care and respect."
--Agent Cooper, Rm. 315
Give me a @#$% break. It's obvious that most of the posts defending Princeford with monikers such as "Ph.D. from lesser institution" are from Princeford affiliates. Who the hell would say "lesser?" Get off your @#!$% high horses. There's a reason why people want to call your Dr. Charles Emerson Winchester III, and it really shows from these posts. You make yourself an elitist bed, you get to lie in it.
I'm not going to name my Ph.D. program, but trust me -- it would be counted in the Top 15, but probably not Top 10. I just hope your scholarship shows a bit more potential for critical thought than your absurd post.
P.S. I'll help you out. These are the places with classics/classical archaeology/ancient history programs I'd rank in the top ten (in no particular order: Penn, Harvard, Yale, Berkeley, Princeton, Stanford, Chicago, Michigan, Columbia, Brown. So that leaves UNC, Duke, Texas, Hopkins, USC, Cincinnati, OSU, etc. I got my degree from one of the schools in the second group.
You make yourself an elitist bed, you get to lie in it.
You've got a deal, sir or madam. That sounds pretty comfy. I'll just need some elitist sheets, a couple of elitist pillowcases, some elitist blankets, and possibly an elitist dust ruffle.
Thanks! :)
Some good news for a change. The Rutgers job looks like it's a "go" now. They've had some TT faculty who've gotten fellowships, etc., and so they'll probably get their VAP hiring they've requested from the administration. I've heard a rumor they may even advertise for a 2nd position after the meetings, or perhaps take a 2nd person from the current pool.
See: it's not all bad news out there.
Post a Comment