All of our first year Latin classes were taught by grad students and sometimes Greek was as well, depending on the grad student. We didn't have MC people in our program (they were all in the history dept or art history depending) but I have former students who are now MC grad students in classical archaeology programs who have already or have been told that they will teach a beginning language class.
Wow, we're actually having some constructive, substantive discussions about the field. For all the complaints about FV, I can guarantee that we wouldn't be asking such hard questions in a fluffy APA roundtable.
Hey, can we cut this UT crap out? The candidates don't need to be freaked out any more than they probably already are. Besides, I heard the interviews at the APA were carnivore-free, so maybe Hannibal's gone off liver. And the crap about favorites? Do you just get off on psyching people out? Anyway, one person's favorite is another person's philologist.
I'm not on the job market nor do I know any of the candidates personally, but I have to wonder how much our selection process suffers when you throw a crushing number of apps at faculty with too much already on their plate. Surely there reaches a point when the process loses an ability to be thorough? When the apps to SC members ratio becomes greater than 20:1? 30:1? More than ever, I don't envy the task before both candidates and SC members.
Don't scapegoat the archaeologists for this nonsense. This search specifically excluded archaeologists thanks to those dastardly devils already at UT who refuse to teach lang/lit.
Hey, can we cut this UT crap out? ... I heard the interviews at the APA were carnivore-free, so maybe Hannibal's gone off liver.
Huh. Now, I wonder why they wouldn't put their worst face forward at the interviews. Next thing you know, you'll be telling us that you heard that everyone was real nice during the campus visits, too, so the leopards have probably changed their spots.
Many people have had bad experiences in that department, and all of the people responsible for those experiences are still there and no less senior than they were before. Everyone who applies for a job there should know that, and it doesn't do anyone any good to pretend it isn't so. Apart from UT, that is.
So, I'm happy to "cut the crap" about UT after the relevant retirements take place, but until then it's not actually "crap."
Don't sound so pious. You were basically smirking at what you reckon is going to be a savaging either on campus or in the job itself. If you have something useful to say then say it. Otherwise, in this job market, I'd give my left arm to a sabretooth ahead of some of the prospects people are facing. Again, if you have something useful to say - like how best to deal with said villain(s) (that doesn't involve just bending over) - then say it.
I second cutting out the UT crap. I said this a few months back when the bashing began, but I spent some time there as a temp within the past few years and it was a great experience. In terms of collegiality* and providing a supportive intellectual environment, they are the best department I have ever been in.
*That includes some, but not all, of the sabre-tooth tigers.
Besides which, I have it on good authority that things have changed/ are changing at UT. The leopards haven't changed their spots, but they don't get their way now.
I am guessing that none of those slinging mud at UT and its search are actual finalists in the afore-mentioned search. If that is the case, I do not see why you show such concern over the sable-toothed tigers -- you're not in any "danger" of working with them!
So, everyone, let's make a collective effort and find something/someone else to bash! How about Willamowitz? (I figure we've gotten everything we could out of the Mommsen topic).
Why the concern? Perhaps because some of the responses were posted by people connected and formerly connected to the department more intimately than you will ever know.
Concerning UT, you reap what you sow. I think it's healthy for senior scholars to start realizing that we live in a different world and classics is even smaller than before. One cannot misbehave with impunity like in past. What's being discussed is going to be a tertiary concern to those in line for the jobs when it comes down to making a decision. I say this weeding of bad behavior is healthy for the discipline as a whole.
What makes you think that the sort of senior scholar to whom you refer (not limited to UT, it's very important to note) cares about what anyone else thinks, or about the good of anyone or any department? No; they're completely self-centered and ineducable. These are not people who look to long-term community gain. The problem is, as at UT and other places, they drag good people down with them.
Yeah, they are slippery, but surely the other faculty can use the comments on here to build a mandate to at least rein in these out-of-control sabretooths? If not by the department, I say at the decanal level if need be. I will not dogmatically support this behavior, even as a member of the academy, like some card carrying member of the UAW.
The answer to those destructive senior scholar(s) is not to marginalize the whole department, which can do a lot of harm, but instead to join it, side with the progressives within the dept and marginalize the difficult individual(s). One can usually get the administration on one's side since the sabretooths tend to be pretty poor with the people skills. If the dept's a one-man show, as in certain smaller institutions, well, that's a whole different matter, I'm afraid.
As a crucial figure in the development of metaphorizing the power relations of UT departmental dynamics, I feel that I must weigh in.
If it holds true (as I believe it does) that the department is composed of a majority of playful kittens -- formerly terrorized by sabre-toothed tigers, which have now been relegated by the zookeeper to the corner cage -- then it surely must also follow that many (though not necessarily all) of the vehement UT detractors are snot-nosed, grubby-fingered kids, whose incessant cries of "tigers are stupid" really belie their frustration at not being allowed to play with the said kittens.
Therefore, will someone take them to the monkeys and buy them corndogs? Maybe that will shut 'em up and end what is perhaps the least useful discussion on this blog.
So far as I know, no one has disputed that, until recently, that was a toxic environment for junior faculty. The sole point of uncertainty is whether that has changed very recently or not. In light of that, I think it's entirely appropriate for people to discuss whether they think a department can change its atmosphere even when the sources of the problem are still present. If everyone agrees that the problem existed at least till recently, and nobody knows whether it still exists, it seems kind of strange not to talk about the problem on the assumption that it no longer exists.
I don't have a dog in this here fight, but the ol' Longhorn Lindy is tuckerin' me out.
Can we all please leave the fine, and not so fine, folks in Austin to their own BBQ? The anti-Texas folks have had their say, the pro-Texas folks have had theirs, and a whole mess of other random comments have been thrown in for good, and not so good, measure. That particular appaloosa is dead and picked clean, folks.
If anyone had anything else to talk about, presumably they would be talking about it.
A fair point, but I do think that Texas discussion has sucked the oxygen out of other, more fruitful ones.
So I'll try to start a new one:
How actively supportive, understanding and hard-working have everybody's advisors and/or degree-granting department been in this market? Have they understood just how calamitous this particular job season has been? What actual support (adjuncting, etc.) have they offered to help get people through this year, and probably next?
This is one thing that really worries me. Are we in danger of losing a cohort or two of good people simply because they chose the wrong time to graduate? What can the field do to ameliorate this? Anything?
their sympathy only runs so deep - yes, we are in danger of losing a number of good people from the field ... this is true in all of the classical disciplines from where i sit - Greek/Latin, anc. history, and archaeology ... esp. true of people who have already moved beyond their PhD granting institutions and have no fallback position, employment-wise.
Let's supplement Tiger Tree's question. How supportive are the colleagues of folks post-PhD who so far are not getting far in this market? Post-PhD students are always more vulnerable in the job market; most grad programs will try to help ABDs and recent grads. with something, even adjuncting.
As for UT, as far as I can see, they've done nothing unprofessional this job search - unlike some other schools who have been mentioned on the next thread down.
Yeah, the discipline is headed in the right direction. We'll lose a cohort or two and the future sabretooths/evil villains who eat their young will represent all that much more (if these people with 5 flybacks exist, which I don't doubt).
So UT is under some kind of damnatio memoriae? Never to be mentioned?
Any speculation about the possible awesomeness or heinousness of UT invites a riposte from someone who disagrees. I'm just responding to the plea that we back off it for a while. I'm sure it'll come up again before long if people feel strongly about it.
Seriously, we need to sit quietly as the baby cubs from P-ford growl and people inexplicably defend the adult SB tigers...mmm...how about them Yankees?
The Eyes of Texas are upon you, All the livelong day, The Eyes of Texas are upon you, You cannot get away. Do not think you can escape them, At night or early in the morn, The Eyes of Texas are upon you, Till Gabriel blows his horn!
I'm bored, so here's a thing. Does anyone have the feeling a search or two listed as t-t (not open rank) might in the end go senior? There are one or two department websites that have made me wonder.
I'm not sure if it's the low number of jobs or the axing of jobs that's making people paranoid, but I think candidates are keeping things close to the vest more than ever before. I'm hearing rumors, so PLEASE update the wiki with offers extended if at all possible.
Texas, Brown...but I could be totally wrong. (Crap, I said the word. Sorry. White flag, white flag. I honestly did not mean this as an excuse to get that UT thing started up again - it's just an observation on their website, nothing to do with predatory felines.)
Only one person on the UT list could even be remotely described as a "senior scholar," and that person did not get tenure at another institution, which to me cancels the senior-ness.
UT lists a lot of talks from INVITED speakers. You may have confused those with the job talks.
How about this for a new topic: What is wrong with these schools that feel they must post their finalists on the web for all the world to see? Sure, it's inevitable that word gets around some, but it seems disrespectful to the candidates that these departments don't even try to show at least a little discretion.
I'm also starting to see some fall 2009 courses get listed with a candidate's name, suggesting that they've accepted the position. I assume that this is unavoidable due to university policy? Perhaps you need a name with a course to make sure it is offered? Any seniors with admin experience know why?
How about this for a new topic: What is wrong with these schools that feel they must post their finalists on the web for all the world to see? Sure, it's inevitable that word gets around some, but it seems disrespectful to the candidates that these departments don't even try to show at least a little discretion.
But it's not like schools are posting lists of finalists: they're posting events/talks, intended to advertise them to the university/Classics community they serve. They're NOT thinking that other candidates who didn't get the interview or the curious will be scouring their website looking for info. I frankly have no problem with such talks being advertised, and I haven't had any problem when I'm listed on an events calendar for a job talk.
Seriously, lay off the personal attacks, people. If you've ever learned anything from the classics, then try to start acting that way.
Hey, if we're going to take antiquity as our moral compass, then I would expect to see nothing but vicious personal attacks. Cicero? Attic oratory? Satire? Old Comedy? Historiography? Iamb?
I say this not to advocate vitriol, but as a reminder that there ain't much class in the classics. Seek your models of decorum elsewhere.
But it's not like schools are posting lists of finalists: they're posting events/talks, intended to advertise them to the university/Classics community they serve.
Right. Departments have never kept their public lectures secret. People who are not interested in knowing what public lectures will be offered are free to refrain from investigating the "Events" sections of department websites.
Hey, if we're going to take antiquity as our moral compass, then I would expect to see nothing but vicious personal attacks. Cicero? Attic oratory? Satire? Old Comedy? Historiography? Iamb?
You're all guilty of sleeping with Vestal Virgins, incest, taking bribes from the Macedonians, and breaking your engagements for nefarious reasons!
I'm also starting to see some fall 2009 courses get listed with a candidate's name, suggesting that they've accepted the position. I assume that this is unavoidable due to university policy? Perhaps you need a name with a course to make sure it is offered?
Each University has different policies, but it's well-known that courses without an instructor listed tend not to enroll well.
As for the person griping about job talks posted on events pages, if you're not one of the finalists, I honestly don't think it's your problem to deal with.
Adam Blistein, Jan. 6th, in the Dec. APA newsletter:
The recent troubles in financial markets have naturally had repercussions in the Classics job market, but for now at least, the number of positions available, while down from significantly from last year, is about the same as it was just three years ago. There is no way of knowing how many jobs will be posted after the annual meeting; so, at this time of the year, the best way to compare markets in different years is to look at the number of institutions conducting interviews at the annual meeting: • Philadelphia (2009) 55 • Chicago (2008) 85 • San Diego (2007) 70 • Montreal (2006) 55
In my ten-year experience the Chicago and San Diego numbers were the outliers as the number of interviewing institutions was typically in the 55 to 65 range. Also, this year the number of candidates registered before the annual meeting was about the same as last year, after two consecutive years of substantial increases.
This is more or less what I thought was the case - the last two years have been *very* good on the market, but we're now returning to pre-2007 job levels. And of course, this is still better than the period 1980's-1990's. But one would like to know how many temp jobs interviewed at the APA - half of my interviews were with such schools.
In a recession education tends to stay flat, i.e., along with health care it's always in demand. But even health care is suffering now. And will Classics stay flat with the rest of education, or is it sufficiently marginal that it will suffer? We really won't know till next year whether the Classics market is in a lengthy downtick. And what's more important for most of us at this stage is how good the spring market in temp jobs will be.
Exactly, that's why it's not good enough just to have the number of universities interviewing. We need to differentiate between TT and non-TT jobs to have a better pulse on what's going on. We also need to provide a ratio between the number of TT jobs and the number of applicants (preferably with those already in TT positions left out).
It will surely get much worse for classics next year - 30 TT jobs? The sciences are treading water right now and will always get hefty grants. We have been treading water at best even during the recent surpluses so there will certainly be some setbacks with the recent downturn. I have no doubts that this recession, if it reaches its full potential, can permanently change the humanities/academic landscape as we know it in North America.
OK, Musketeers, I've done some counting on the wiki. Counting all institutions listed as interviewing at the APA, I get the following breakdown:
37 T-T positions (this includes some open-rank and senior positions; it does not include Swarthmore's mystery job)
22 temporary
Blistein's numbers are for institutions, so note I've counted schools with multiple positions (Gettysburg, Georgetown, Baylor, and The School That Must Not Be Named) multiple times - I'm counting jobs, not institutions.
There is no way of knowing how many jobs will be posted after the annual meeting; so, at this time of the year, the best way to compare markets in different years is to look at the number of institutions conducting interviews at the annual meeting.
Wow. It is now official. Adam Blistein is a moron. If this is the official APA line on this then we have no hope of getting useful info out of them. They are f&*@!*#g deluded.
The best way to compare markets is to, uhhh, compare markets. We can't get a complete handle on this market until around July, after the Spring jobs have closed. Comparing numbers of institutions signed up for the Placement Service is much too crude, and necessarily incomplete.
As mentioned above, the difference in TT jobs vs. non-TT jobs needs to be figured out. Also, I know of a few places which interviewed at the APA that are not continuing on with the search. So those "participating institutions" ought not to count at all. Finally, the Spring market looks like a complete bust so far. Much, much, much worse than in previous years.
I predict that this year will see a 30% drop in TT jobs offered (offered, not advertized - big difference!) from last year, and a 20% drop in jobs offered overall (TT and non-TT). Next year will continue this trend. To suggest, as I read Blistein's comments, that this year is merely a correction back to normal (pre-2007) betrays a serious lack of understanding.
If the APA is going to offer real leadership then they had damn well better be willing to be honest in their use of statistics.
I don't get pissed off easily, but Blistein has managed to do it.
"Also, I know of a few places which interviewed at the APA that are not continuing on with the search."
For those of us who are not privy to such knowledge but are desperate to know what's going on with some of these searches, can you tell us which places you're referring to?? (I assume you're talking about information that's *not* available on the wiki.)
I agree the numbers in that piece weren't terrifically meaningful. But then he didn't have much else to go on at that stage - it being well before Christmas, when the job market hadn't really happened yet and when a lot of institutions hadn't yet figured things out (why so late? - that's a whole different problem...). He could have written a searingly honest piece about not knowing anything and about how the whole t-t bubble might burst (not much of a bubble in the first place, more a sop), but executive directors of anything aren't paid to be disappointingly frank. That isn't an APA problem, however - it's systemic, perhaps even epidemic. Plus there's always the argument (which I'm ambivalent about) that depression and hysteria, however justified, don't help. But maybe I just enjoy being morose.
To suggest, as I read Blistein's comments, that this year is merely a correction back to normal (pre-2007) betrays a serious lack of understanding.
The question is, what is "normal"? I'm not trying to be difficult, but what is our baseline? Is there one? Is normal X amount of t-t jobs per year? Is "normal" the job markets of 10-20 years ago (much worse than even 5 years ago)?
As for institutions not going on with the search after an APA interview, someone mentioned on the next thread down that Hobart and William Smith might be one, but that's unconfirmed as far as I know. Institutions that are not expecting their searches to continue really need to alert interviewees.
The spring job market will be interesting. I keep hearing two theories: 1) it, too, will be bad, and below "normal," or 2) it will remain steady or be bullish because schools won't have the money for t-t track jobs but WILL have the money for temporary jobs. We'll probably know in a week or ten days, since the February ads tend to be a bellwether, but any thoughts or forehand knowledge?
I think a big problem is that once you get tenured or are in a relatively secure job like Blistein - i.e. those who are in a position to take action and rally the troops - you don't really give a damn. Yeah, you're exposed to it to a certainly degree through your students, but you have your hands full writing books and writing personal emails to each candidate. You *know* it's bad and maybe express some concern (and helplessness), but that's the extent of any action I've seen. I suspect once a number of us enter the TT stream, we'll be busy trying to swim up the current and spawn our careers also. In the meantime, the stream gets drier and drier...
I dunno...some of my recommenders have really gone to bat for me. But they are the exception, not the rule - there is a little bit of a "sink or swim, kiddo" mentality.
Well, I think it's bloody ridiculous and a bit like an ostrich with its head in the sand. The president of the APA and AIA should be responsible for giving a state of the discipline address at least once a year. They should also have a top senior academic chair a committee concerned with the health of the discipline - make them a vice-president responsible only to the president. This should someone at the zenith of their career with some decanal or at least chair experience. There are bunch of these bigwigs around who have acheived pretty much all they can in the discipline - give them a new challenge. Pay or cajole their institution to give them something akin to decanal or editor-in-chief status in terms of course releases and whatnot. Honestly, I just don't get it.
As I peruse the shrieks of alarm at the state of the market and the field that comprise a sizable piece of the posts above, I wonder: as classicists, are we conditioned to read "decline and fall" into every data set we encounter?
...as classicists, are we conditioned to read "decline and fall" into every data set we encounter?
I've been wondering that myself. But I think some of the statistics offered above do suggest that this is a grim year. Looking at the wiki, 7-8 jobs have been canceled, which is way more than I can remember from the past few years.
I don't understand why some appear not to grasp that the APA and other similar professional organizations are basically impotent. You want a union or something, not the APA. And if you want the APA to be a powerful organization, your dues are going to have to be just a little bit higher than the pocket change you're currently throwing into the basket every year. And honestly, even in organizations that do have some power, forming a committee isn't a recipe for solutions. Maybe "somebody should do something," but to identify that "somebody" as "The American Philological Association" is fundamentally to misunderstand what that organization is and can do. It's also wildly to exaggerate the real-world power of even the biggest of our wigs—there's not one who has enough influence to save a single job outside her/his own institution.
For those of us who are not privy to such knowledge but are desperate to know what's going on with some of these searches, can you tell us which places you're referring to?? (I assume you're talking about information that's *not* available on the wiki.)
Yeah, sorry about that.
I am 90% sure that OSU-Newark, Georgia State, Emory, and Hobart are all finis.
Now, before the cries of outrage... I could be wrong. And I don't think we can expect to hear anything from these places until the fat lady sings. Who knows, maybe they'll pull the funding out of somewhere. Right now, however, it don't look good. I am also not an applicant to any of them, so this isn't some sly psych-out job.
I'll still lay down some anonymous, meaningless capital that says we don't see these four places make a hire this year.
This is just an EARLY synopsis, but when we look back I think we'll see an unusual bimodal timeline to how searches played out this year, explaining the hodgepodge documentation on the wiki.
I think a bunch of hires are already in the books - a number of institutions rushed to make sure they were approved before any second thoughts from the deans. This includes a number of internal candidates from my small sample set.
A number of other institutions are playing the waiting game either voluntarily or involuntarily due to the tenuous financial situation we're in. This is stretching some searches out longer than normal by a month - i.e. I think they will go into late March and maybe April.
So in the end, combined with the dearth of TT jobs, it's making for a rather dull February on here, which is usually when the contracts start getting signed in mass.
PLEASE, if a contract is signed, don't be bashful and update the wiki. While you're at it, post in the And There Was Much Rejoicing section of FV and we'll celebrate with you. This will have the added benefit of putting people out of their misery and let them start planning for the future.
I think you might be wrong about OSU-Newark. I was recently speaking to someone from OSU (Columbus) and the topic of that search came up briefly, and without mention of its having been called off. Sorry that I don't have anything more reliable than that.
I admit I don't know the OSU system all that well, but why would someone from another campus know the inner workings of a search, even if they are in the same state system? I mean, surely someone from SUNY-Buffalo has little reason to know what's happening at SUNY-Stonybrook.
The OSU satellites are not the same as a system like SUNY or CSU. They are "satellite" campuses that serve place bound adult learners or serve as feeders to the main campus--more like a junior college in CA. The search is being conducted by the Classics department on main campus in Columbus
Regardless, our experience on here has been that the rumor more often than not ends up being true, and a strong indicator of a position going belly up is when a faculty member strongly denies its imminent demise. Plus I would keep as many people in the dark as possible if I were a search chair. Why? plausible deniability
The only person I know who interviewed at OSU-Newark was told, by an OSU-Columbus faculty member, that he didn't get further than an APA interview, but no details about whether someone else had been invited to campus or what. Any other interviewees out there?
Plus I would keep as many people in the dark as possible if I were a search chair. Why? plausible deniability
Care to unpack this logic for us? Deniability of what, exactly? You wouldn't say anything till you were sure the administration had pulled the position, because you wouldn't want your candidates to write you off and take other positions, but once the position is gone, there's nothing I can see to be gained from keeping it a secret. You just blame your administration (correctly) for ending the search and apologize to those who were up for the job.
Two friends and I, none of whom has previously mentioned this on the blog, were interviewed by OSU Newark. None of us has heard anything from them. On the other hand, I do know that they made a short-list at the convention.
So did Michigan hire that last guy or what? The rest of us are still here waiting with absolutely no news whatsoever. Thanks a bunch.
Well, as you should know, even if an offer has been made -- which almost certainly hasn't happened yet -- that offer would not have been accepted so quickly. So there probably won't be any real news on this one just yet. Since you almost certainly are not a candidate for the position, I suggest that you look for news elsewhere. Perhaps try the Drudge Report...
Not OSU, but I know of at least two jobs that I heard were offered. Unfortunately, it's very preliminary and there was a big flap last year from the people who were offered the job when they were "outed" prematurely.
Exactly. If a job has definitely been offered, then of course that information should be posted, though without the name. After all, that's why this blog/wiki exists!
Do be sure to differentiate between offered and offered/accepted.
Well, as you should know, even if an offer has been made -- which almost certainly hasn't happened yet -- that offer would not have been accepted so quickly. So there probably won't be any real news on this one just yet. Since you almost certainly are not a candidate for the position, I suggest that you look for news elsewhere. Perhaps try the Drudge Report...
I'm just going to have to school you. A cttee vote can take place as soon as the last candidate has left town. So news (yes, fama) can be posted by someone in the know pretty much immediately. I don't know if there is any news, hence my question. But boy it must be a pleasure to feel as smart as you clearly are.
Wrong on both counts. So maybe you two aren't as clever as you think.
The exact question to which I was responding was "So did Michigan hire that last guy or what?" As people with at least some training in reading texts, I would have hoped you'd be bright enough to recognize the difference between the verb "hire" and the verb "offer." (Perhaps you need to see those written in Latin or Greek to take the time to analyze how they were used and what the authorial intent was?) No one has been hired by Michigan, and it would be unreasonable to expect someone to have been hired just over a week after the last candidate had visited. What I wrote is so obvious, frankly, that I almost didn't bother to respond. Whether an offer has been made I do not know, but I do know that no one has been hired.
Someone the other day was wondering why this site is short on information and long on "spleen." Here's part of the reason why: a lot of people, myself included, are turned off by the attitudes that so many people reveal when they can hide behind the cloak of anonymity. I know people who've stopped coming here simply because of all the negativity and hostility. Your two posts are yet another example of this, albeit a relatively minor one.
I know people who've stopped coming here simply because of all the negativity and hostility.
I know I stopped reading for a bit and mostly just peruse to check the wiki itself. It is a shame that the goings on here damage the use of the wiki since I think it is a good thing.
Dude asked about Michigan. You got all self-righteous. That's the story. If you want a reason why people don't come to this site, I believe someone said something about a plank and an eye.
Yeah, the average classics department (and internet forum) is no much friendlier and everyone passes out lollipops...snort. Who's living in the real world and who's in lala land, LMAO?
Latest spat aside, venom has nothing to do with this site not being used. There was plenty of action last year, much more cutting than anything on show this time round, but still people kept posting info. More tellingly, the Wiki's pretty bare (even accounting for fewer jobs). I guess the previous generation were more avid, and more fair-weather, with FV.
Dude asked about Michigan. You got all self-righteous. That's the story. If you want a reason why people don't come to this site, I believe someone said something about a plank and an eye.
The "dude" asked specifically about whether a certain candidate had been hired. The "dude" should have known that on this forum we do not out job recipients or discuss individuals. The "dude" should also have known that with at least one senior candidate in the mix it's probably not a simple matter of a departmental vote and an offer being extended right away. And there are other things that the "dude" should also have known, but I'm not spending more time on this. All in all, it was a question that should not have been asked, or at least not in that way.
This place has definitely become less populated once it became clear that sabretooths were prowling with their thinly-veiled threats laced with self-righteousness.
This is how I'd have answered the question re: Michigan.
"The situation is complicated because there are senior and junior candidates, though only senior candidates have been invited so far. If an offer is made, and I don't know that one has, I encourage someone to make that public, though with no names attached. Let's please try to keep the no names/identifications rule as strictly as possible."
Or alternatively I could have congratulated the original poster for not being a candidate and then mocked her/him for being a right-wing conspiracy theorist. Classy.
This place has definitely become less populated once it became clear that sabretooths were prowling with their thinly-veiled threats laced with self-righteousness.
Or maybe people are worried that paranoid delusion is contagious.
Paranoid? Have you been reading the ruler-tapping posts by senior scholars on here lately? I thought the main purpose of this blog was to make the entire classics job search process more transparent for CANDIDATES, individual departmental machinations be damned. When these ruler-tappers decry the openness made possible by anonymity, I interpret it as simply a ridiculous attempt to expand the authority of their pathetic classics fiefdom in an internet age. Welcome to the 21st century.
Paranoid? Have you been reading the ruler-tapping posts by senior scholars on here lately? I thought the main purpose of this blog was to make the entire classics job search process more transparent for CANDIDATES, individual departmental machinations be damned. When these ruler-tappers decry the openness made possible by anonymity, I interpret it as simply a ridiculous attempt to expand the authority of their pathetic classics fiefdom in an internet age. Welcome to the 21st century.
You're right, you're obviously not at all paranoid. I stand corrected.
When these ruler-tappers decry the openness made possible by anonymity, I interpret it as simply a ridiculous attempt to expand the authority of their pathetic classics fiefdom in an internet age.
Anonymous 4:59, was your comment referring to my statement that "a lot of people, myself included, are turned off by the attitudes that so many people reveal when they can hide behind the cloak of anonymity"? I hope so, because right now I'm sitting in an unnamed department's library -- since I don't have my own office at this point in my career -- grinning from ear to ear at how mistaken you are.
Back to checking on something in Robert Parker's "Miasma"...
I hope so, because right now I'm sitting in an unnamed department's library -- since I don't have my own office at this point in my career -- grinning from ear to ear at how mistaken you are.
AHA! That's exactly what an old sabretooth pretending to be a grad student would say!!1! Which only confirms my point.
Did we actually get any new info at the end of this 'discussion'? As rashly phrased as the first poster's question may have been, it was a question. And the same could go for any number of other searches. Why is this year like wringing blood from a stone? Astonishingly, some people even seem complicit with the idea of not spreading rumors. (So why not just keep quiet?) I don't think this blog is policed (like some) or offensive (like others); thanks to dereliction it's just become a bit useless.
Did we actually get any new info at the end of this 'discussion'?
Well, yes. That nobody who feels like sharing has any information about that search, even when specifically asked about it. If you really would like a different answer, though, I'm happy to provide one: "yes, that last guy was hired." I have no idea if it's true, but at least it's specific. Enjoy.
What I would like some info on is the Swarthmore search(es). I know it's been mentioned in the past, but figured it was time to revisit this enigma of a situation. Anyone know anything? Anything at all?
Interesting. You source not good English very speak?
In any case, I have it on good authority that all of the candidates were hired into that job and that they are all currently riding magical unicorns to Ann Arbor.
To find out whether you are one of those lucky candidates, follow these easy steps.
1. Look down. 2. Do you see a magical unicorn? (If "yes," continue to step 3; if "no," proceed to step 4.) 3. Hooray! (skip to step 5) 4. I'm very sorry. 5. The end
Interesting. You source not good English very speak?
In any case, I have it on good authority that all of the candidates were hired into that job and that they are all currently riding magical unicorns to Ann Arbor.
To find out whether you are one of those lucky candidates, follow these easy steps.
1. Look down. 2. Do you see a magical unicorn? (If "yes," continue to step 3; if "no," proceed to step 4.) 3. Hooray! (skip to step 5) 4. I'm very sorry. 5. The end
Congratulations on being a jerk. Responses like this are leading people to quit using the wiki. Which is too bad, because I've been on the market with and without the wiki, and I can assure you that it is much better when this site functions as it should and we cooperate instead of picking each other apart.
Congratulations on being a jerk. Responses like this are leading people to quit using the wiki. Which is too bad, because I've been on the market with and without the wiki, and I can assure you that it is much better when this site functions as it should and we cooperate instead of picking each other apart.
Hear, hear!!
Look, if you don't think sites like these are useful, please don't use them. Nobody is holding a gun to your head. There are a bunch of us who are actually interested in helping each other. Please take your snark, your childish pettiness, and your deliberately obtuse and uncharitable responses elsewhere. They just aren't wanted here.
This process is enough of a pain in the ass as it is. It'd be nice not having to deal with anonymous jerks who can't seem to understand that the very purpose of this board and the wiki is to make a necessary evil more transparent and, hopefully, a little less stressful.
Capice?
To everybody else, who actually want to be helpful and supportive:
Responses like this are leading people to quit using the wiki.
I hardly ever come to FV and I hardly ever post, because of the tone. But it doesn't stop me from using the wiki. In fact, by our counter more people are using the wiki than last year. FV doesn't endanger the wiki; FV endangers FV, possibly because FV is not as obviously useful as the wiki, when most of the posts are part of some debate, and questions about jobs (like the Swarthmore one) often go unanswerered.
And since FV can be read by anyone on the internets, who knows what it's doing to Classics's reputation? One of my senior colleagues reads it occasionally, and said it always gives him the impression that the field is degenerating rapidly and everyone (especially MC people) is unhappy. Do we really want some dean to find this and view our internecine contemplations of the Death of Classics? (Extreme case, I know, but I'm trying to get a point across.) Last year we go some kind of politeness mention, and I'm sure we're still not as bad as the philosophers or whoever it was, but it'd be nice to do that again.
What I would like some info on is the Swarthmore search(es).
What you'll probably get is a pile of condescension and a lecture on minding your own business. (Though I hope someone has something better for you.)
On another note, the Wiki is for definite news, FV is for rumors. I thought the Latin made that distinction clear, but I guess one can't assume anything these days.
Re Michigan's hire: I have it on good authority that they've extended an offer to an older gentleman, who has written mostly about the French, and wars, and generally works best in groups of three. Michigan is hoping to make it a dynastic hire, since the gentleman in question has a well-qualified great-nephew whom the department expects will be terrific negotiating with administrators. Both men are interested in striking their own coinage, which the state of Michigan sorely needs. Neither owns a unicorn, however.
Re Michigan's hire: I have it on good authority that they've extended an offer to an older gentleman, who has written mostly about the French, and wars, and generally works best in groups of three. Michigan is hoping to make it a dynastic hire, since the gentleman in question has a well-qualified great-nephew whom the department expects will be terrific negotiating with administrators. Both men are interested in striking their own coinage, which the state of Michigan sorely needs. Neither owns a unicorn, however.
"And since FV can be read by anyone on the internets, who knows what it's doing to Classics's reputation? One of my senior colleagues reads it occasionally, and said it always gives him the impression that the field is degenerating rapidly and everyone (especially MC people) is unhappy. Do we really want some dean to find this and view our internecine contemplations of the Death of Classics? (Extreme case, I know, but I'm trying to get a point across.) Last year we go some kind of politeness mention, and I'm sure we're still not as bad as the philosophers or whoever it was, but it'd be nice to do that again."
Yes'm, we's MC folks will be keeping our trap shut from now on so wes can be telling da world how great we's been treated by you nice folks.
I initially thought there were a whole bunch of troubled, snarky people on FV this year -- but I am coming to see that it's pretty much one troubled snarky person (see above) and that we shouldn't take his/her bait.
Last year I was struck when comparing the comments on FV with the comments posted on the wikis in larger fields such as Philosophy and English by how generous and constructive the discussion here was, as opposed to the paranoia and hostility towards peers expressed there. It looks as though perhaps it is market conditions that produce such behaviour given that supportive collegiality has diminished greatly on FV this year at about the same rate that jobs have been cancelled. Though I must say English has veered towards supportive collegiality. Perhaps that comes when you fully comprehend that thanks to the financial crisis you have better odds of winning the lottery than landing a tenure track job.
Being generous and supportive of your peers, sharing information, and giving sage advice will not diminish your chances of getting the job you want. Seriously. If you are good at what you do and have managed to get an on campus interview, don't screw yourself by failing to keep unusual personal tics under control. Assume, however, that everyone else with an on campus interview is as qualified and decent as you are - as were many of the people who applied for the job and were not shortlisted. Keep in mind that some of us who are monitoring FV and the wiki are on the verge of watching their dreams for their future career crumble. If you think people are out to get you, I recommend you stop feeding your paranoia on FV, go buy yourself a large supply of tinfoil and start lining your office/bedroom/cubicle.
For everyone else: be supportive, be generous in your assumptions about your peers and future/current colleagues. It will buoy the spirits of those on the market, knowing that if they are so fortunate as to get an academic job, t-t or otherwise, that the people they are going to be working with are more likely to offer to read a draft of an article for them than try to push them down the stairwell so as to increase their share of the money in the department travel fund.
PS Tiger Tree -- I missed you. I am glad to see you are still about. I hope you have many interviews. Your posts make me think you are someone that I would enjoy having as a colleague.
PS Tiger Tree -- I missed you. I am glad to see you are still about. I hope you have many interviews. Your posts make me think you are someone that I would enjoy having as a colleague.
My ideal department would have both Tiger Tree and Poldy in it. That department would be totally kick-ass.
Yes'm, we's MC folks will be keeping our trap shut from now on so wes can be telling da world how great we's been treated by you nice folks.
The original poster was quoting someone. The question is not whether it's true, but whether that's the impression readers get. And is that the kind of impression we want to convey? Your comment does not advance the discussion.
Get a room...I thought the rendevous was already set up for Philadelphia.
Um...whoever posted that wasn't the one who set up the rendezvous for Philly, which was moi. It was everything we both had dreamed of. But now you say s/he* is cheating on me?!
Hah! I was right! The wiki reports that OSU-Newark's search is still alive. I wrote last week that I had reason to believe it was, but there were doubters (not to mention one or two rather silly comments in response). But it looks like I was right after all.
That'll teach you to believe what anonymous people on the internet tell you!
yes, as in Coral Gables and football, not "fake" Miami in "fake" Oxford in real Ohio. Anyone have a clue what's going on there? They phone interviewed. They conference interviewed. They had some fly-outs. They canceled other fly-outs. Has the line gone dead? Is this thing on?
SECONDED. (Re: Curious about Miami) To whomever posted on the wiki: how did you find out that one of the searches was canceled? And do you have any information on the profile of the search that's still alive? I've heard nothing since a conference interview.
Well, I am very glad that the OSU-Newark position seems to be on, and that I was wrong in my doomsday prediction for it!
But the lesson learned isn't to distrust anonymous sources of info. After all, I signed my own pseudonym to the prediction. Don't slander the poor anonymous folks. They are a different breed altogether!
Even though I didn't receive a campus interview I have been very impressed with how Miami has handled their search process. Good communication, very nice search chair, and a very transparent process. Not sure why you are complaining...
Strange is such a relative term. My roommate thinks the entire classics search apparatus is strange. He couldn't believe that we conference interview and flyout candidates for 1-year VAPs at podunk colleges. He thinks the entire courtship-like process is strange. He looked over my list of common APA interview questions and thought the entire thing esoteric and quaint.
"Even though I didn't receive a campus interview I have been very impressed with how Miami has handled their search process. Good communication, very nice search chair, and a very transparent process. Not sure why you are complaining..."
How do we know that you're not a SC member? I don't even have my tinfoil hat on and I'm suspicious.
Even though I didn't receive a campus interview I have been very impressed with how Miami has handled their search process. Good communication, very nice search chair, and a very transparent process. Not sure why you are complaining...
I know the rest of the world uses the DD.MM.YY format, but I can see some wiki confusion in the future for dates listed as 3.2.09. Just an observation.
Same with me. My guess is that they've made an offer to someone, but that person is being considered elsewhere. So it could still be a while before we know something...
Here's a question - did anyone who was asked for additional materials after they had already interviewed a number of candidates in mid-December subsequently get an interview? I know {men} a number of people who were interviewed in the first [and only?] round and a number of people who were asked for additional materials after that first round had happened. I don't know {de} a single person who was interviewed after that first round.
I feel as if, given the market, a lot of schools are getting a real sense of what's out there, who's available-- which is fine, of course. EXCEPT that it gets a lot of candidates' hopes up unnecessarily, and then we all wallow in this limbo (purgatory?) of not having information as to what's going on in the search, where we stand, whether they were just "window shopping" with our additional materials, and so on.
The thing about Gallatin is that there are a number of factors than many searches do not have. First, it's in Manhattan. Combined with the economy, this will lead to a remarkably deep pool of candidates. Second, it's truly an interdisciplinary program. So the SC probably has a member or two from Gallatin, one from Classics, Anthro, Art History, History, etc. It is guaranteed to be a hydra-like beast pulled in all directions. In the end, this will lead to senior candidates really standing out. There will be a bunch wanting to move to NY and they've had the chance to take their research in non-traditional directions that junior candidates have not had the time or luxury to develop. Can junior candidates succeed? Sure, but it will at best be similar to an open search at top institutions. I put by money on a senior scholar currently in a solid if not elite program who is a bit funky as defined by traditional classics.
I often object to the bitter tone of the blog — there are after all, a lot of us and not many jobs, so things are bound to be or seem unfair. But it seems that a more cynical view of the Gallatin situation is possible. There is only one Classicist at Gallatin. She also teaches in a certain graduate department. The ad reflected rather strongly the interests of people in that department. So it might have been written to allow her to hire someone from it. So....I'm not sure I would bet on someone senior.
Gallatin & co There is only one Classicist at Gallatin. She also teaches in a certain graduate department... written to allow her to hire someone from it.
A lot of subjunctives and speculation. I have nothing to do with that "certain graduate department", and I am not at Gallatin either, BUT I have looked at both of them seriously for various reasons. Gallatin is a special chimera in this field: multidisciplinary and theoretical to an extreme. It's not a surprise that they drew their senior Classicist from that "certain department", which is also an exemplum of interdisciplinary and theoretical studies. If a candidate therefrom does get the Gallatin job, I wouldn't be surprised - nor would i necessarily call foul play & nepotism. If you have ever looked at Gallatin seriously, you will notice immediately that 95% of graduate programs in American (probably more, and probably not just in America) simply don't prepare candidates for that sort of cross-pollinating, theory-head atmosphere. At the end of the day, we are still left with these subjunctives; for, as with the Miami search, we are simply speculating. This is all fama, and we're taking solace in each other's conjectures.
The problem is, it's not a rumor. It's a theory, and a pretty dumb one at that. It's not based on anything, and it's a pretty flimsy basis for implying that unnamed sole classicist at Gallatin is somehow running a sham search single-handedly.
The problem is, it's not a rumor. It's a theory, and a pretty dumb one at that.
Yeah, but my point - perhaps I should have spelled it out - was that the person made it pretty clear it was just a conspiracy theory. They said it was a cynical, possible view. They didn't need a lecture. As long as people acknowledge that this is their crazy two cents' worth, aren't we all adult enough to let them have their say and draw our own conclusions?
Personally, I can't think of anyone who fits the Gallatin posting AND the school itself. I guess they want someone capable of writing something like "The Corrupting Sea," but with less fact and more abstract thought?
Looking over their faculty, I get the impression that they can prepare artists and actors, but their students will come away knowing little about how the world really works. History, economics, politics, etc. are not represented the way they would be at a normal school. (If ever Anne Hathaway becomes an activist I'll know I can ignore her; Natalie Portman at least went to Harvard and might have something worthwhile to say...)
For you veteran MCers out there, what do you make of the market this year? I know it's generally craptastic, like every other discipline, but qualitatively speaking, is it common to have such a dichotomous offering, at least to my eyes?
The positions either seem to be at elite schools (usually for senior candidates) or at low end schools. Where are all the MC jobs from excellent schools that aren't elite? i.e. flagship or near flagship state schools and solid SLACs?
Yeah, I was surprised by the February ads. But IIRC last year's Feb. ads were thin as well; the VAP I ended up getting wasn't advertised till March 15, I think.
While we're on the subject of NYU-related institutions, does anyone know if anyone has heard from the Institute for the Study of the Ancient World about their 2009-10 fellowships? It's been 2+ months since the deadline, so presumably they'll be reaching a decision soon, if they haven't already.
I wouldn't hold your breath. Just as you need to know the Chalcock at the JIAAW, you really need to be a part of a "family" network at the ISAW to have a solid chance. It's possible as an outsider, but like said, don't hold your breath.
Agreed, I think the more financially independent an institute, the more power there is concentrated in a few people with little meddling by the university. This is especially true with new institutes trying to get off the ground.
What stage? The lunch stage. I would say that a Columbia alum is sidling up to the director at an outdoor cafe in Manhattan reminiscing until the alum says, "You know, I have this fantastic student that has rockstar branded on his head..."
Now that ISAW is on its feet and running, I would be quite surprised if any Columbia alumni get fellowship offers there. Of course there was plenty of time to hurl accusations openly at the director during the Q/A session of the APA's Presidential panel. He was quite open about the format and direction of the institution that January evening in Philadelphia. All that said, you may want to check the intellectual "rock-star" credentials of past CU alumni who have done time at ISAW. Yes, you too may be impressed! and perhaps even cool it with the conspiracy theories (even if the whole point of "famae volent" is apparently to promote such).
1,771 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 801 – 1000 of 1771 Newer› Newest»All of our first year Latin classes were taught by grad students and sometimes Greek was as well, depending on the grad student. We didn't have MC people in our program (they were all in the history dept or art history depending) but I have former students who are now MC grad students in classical archaeology programs who have already or have been told that they will teach a beginning language class.
Just out of curiosity, do all of your departments actually let MC people or even grad students in general teach beginning language courses?
Yes.
Wow, we're actually having some constructive, substantive discussions about the field. For all the complaints about FV, I can guarantee that we wouldn't be asking such hard questions in a fluffy APA roundtable.
Just out of curiosity, do all of your departments actually let MC people or even grad students in general teach beginning language courses?
Yes for Latin. There's more competition to teach Greek language courses, and they end up being taught by grad students doing Greek literature.
A bit like the job market, actually.
For those interested, it looks like Texas has posted its job talks on its website events calendar.
It's like watching the Silence of the Lambs...
It's like watching the Silence of the Lambs...
Indeed, and you can pretty much tell who the favorites are just by looking at the UT talk list.
It rubs the lotion on its skin. It does this whenever it is told.
Indeed, and you can pretty much tell who the favorites are just by looking at the UT talk list.
Really? I've seen one of these perform before, and I was underwhelmed.
Really? I've seen one of these perform before, and I was underwhelmed.
Not one of the favorites, then...
"Really? I've seen one of these perform before, and I was underwhelmed."
Hey, look, everybody! Some anonymous person on the internet wasn't completely bowled over by a talk or something somebody gave one time.
All I can say is, whoever gave that talk or something must be pretty lame not to have completely bowled over an anonymous person on the internet.
Hey, can we cut this UT crap out? The candidates don't need to be freaked out any more than they probably already are. Besides, I heard the interviews at the APA were carnivore-free, so maybe Hannibal's gone off liver. And the crap about favorites? Do you just get off on psyching people out? Anyway, one person's favorite is another person's philologist.
I'm not on the job market nor do I know any of the candidates personally, but I have to wonder how much our selection process suffers when you throw a crushing number of apps at faculty with too much already on their plate. Surely there reaches a point when the process loses an ability to be thorough? When the apps to SC members ratio becomes greater than 20:1? 30:1? More than ever, I don't envy the task before both candidates and SC members.
Gird yourself to be underwhelmed.
Don't scapegoat the archaeologists for this nonsense. This search specifically excluded archaeologists thanks to those dastardly devils already at UT who refuse to teach lang/lit.
Naw, archaeologists don't bring knives to a gunfight.
Hey, can we cut this UT crap out? ... I heard the interviews at the APA were carnivore-free, so maybe Hannibal's gone off liver.
Huh. Now, I wonder why they wouldn't put their worst face forward at the interviews. Next thing you know, you'll be telling us that you heard that everyone was real nice during the campus visits, too, so the leopards have probably changed their spots.
Many people have had bad experiences in that department, and all of the people responsible for those experiences are still there and no less senior than they were before. Everyone who applies for a job there should know that, and it doesn't do anyone any good to pretend it isn't so. Apart from UT, that is.
So, I'm happy to "cut the crap" about UT after the relevant retirements take place, but until then it's not actually "crap."
Don't sound so pious. You were basically smirking at what you reckon is going to be a savaging either on campus or in the job itself. If you have something useful to say then say it. Otherwise, in this job market, I'd give my left arm to a sabretooth ahead of some of the prospects people are facing. Again, if you have something useful to say - like how best to deal with said villain(s) (that doesn't involve just bending over) - then say it.
I second cutting out the UT crap. I said this a few months back when the bashing began, but I spent some time there as a temp within the past few years and it was a great experience. In terms of collegiality* and providing a supportive intellectual environment, they are the best department I have ever been in.
*That includes some, but not all, of the sabre-tooth tigers.
Besides which, I have it on good authority that things have changed/ are changing at UT. The leopards haven't changed their spots, but they don't get their way now.
I am guessing that none of those slinging mud at UT and its search are actual finalists in the afore-mentioned search. If that is the case, I do not see why you show such concern over the sable-toothed tigers -- you're not in any "danger" of working with them!
So, everyone, let's make a collective effort and find something/someone else to bash! How about Willamowitz? (I figure we've gotten everything we could out of the Mommsen topic).
Why the concern? Perhaps because some of the responses were posted by people connected and formerly connected to the department more intimately than you will ever know.
So, everyone, let's make a collective effort and find something/someone else to bash! How about Willamowitz?
You're right, we should move on. I'm sick of the UT thing too.
Let's bash people who don't know how to spell Wilamowitz's name.
Show-off! Let's see you try to spell Mole-in-dorfff...
Let's bash people who don't know how to spell Wilamowitz's name.
I will see your Wilamowitz and raise you one Rostovtsev... Rostovtzeff...
I just got the February early edition...talk about underwhelming.
I wish I had traded in my US passport for a shiny Canadian one! Hockey, Horton's, and jobs galore!
Re: February edition - so glad I didn't bother with the Christendom application!
Yeah, but it would be a frozen shiny passport, which I supppose you could use as a puck.
Concerning UT, you reap what you sow. I think it's healthy for senior scholars to start realizing that we live in a different world and classics is even smaller than before. One cannot misbehave with impunity like in past. What's being discussed is going to be a tertiary concern to those in line for the jobs when it comes down to making a decision. I say this weeding of bad behavior is healthy for the discipline as a whole.
Anon. 3:06 -
What makes you think that the sort of senior scholar to whom you refer (not limited to UT, it's very important to note) cares about what anyone else thinks, or about the good of anyone or any department? No; they're completely self-centered and ineducable. These are not people who look to long-term community gain. The problem is, as at UT and other places, they drag good people down with them.
Yeah, they are slippery, but surely the other faculty can use the comments on here to build a mandate to at least rein in these out-of-control sabretooths? If not by the department, I say at the decanal level if need be. I will not dogmatically support this behavior, even as a member of the academy, like some card carrying member of the UAW.
The answer to those destructive senior scholar(s) is not to marginalize the whole department, which can do a lot of harm, but instead to join it, side with the progressives within the dept and marginalize the difficult individual(s). One can usually get the administration on one's side since the sabretooths tend to be pretty poor with the people skills. If the dept's a one-man show, as in certain smaller institutions, well, that's a whole different matter, I'm afraid.
As a crucial figure in the development of metaphorizing the power relations of UT departmental dynamics, I feel that I must weigh in.
If it holds true (as I believe it does) that the department is composed of a majority of playful kittens -- formerly terrorized by sabre-toothed tigers, which have now been relegated by the zookeeper to the corner cage -- then it surely must also follow that many (though not necessarily all) of the vehement UT detractors are snot-nosed, grubby-fingered kids, whose incessant cries of "tigers are stupid" really belie their frustration at not being allowed to play with the said kittens.
Therefore, will someone take them to the monkeys and buy them corndogs? Maybe that will shut 'em up and end what is perhaps the least useful discussion on this blog.
Caveat Mendicaus
Let's bash people who don't know how to spell Wilamowitz's name.
Who's Wilamowitz again? The name sounds familiar, like something I came across during graduate exams...
"it surely must also follow that many (though not necessarily all) of the vehement UT detractors are snot-nosed, grubby-fingered kids"
Yeah... that or douchebags.
Mmmmm...corndogs...
Mmmmm...corndogs...
Seconded, vigorously.
Heehaw! Don't mess with Texas! 1,2,3,4...
Yeah... that or douchebags.
So far as I know, no one has disputed that, until recently, that was a toxic environment for junior faculty. The sole point of uncertainty is whether that has changed very recently or not. In light of that, I think it's entirely appropriate for people to discuss whether they think a department can change its atmosphere even when the sources of the problem are still present. If everyone agrees that the problem existed at least till recently, and nobody knows whether it still exists, it seems kind of strange not to talk about the problem on the assumption that it no longer exists.
I don't have a dog in this here fight, but the ol' Longhorn Lindy is tuckerin' me out.
Can we all please leave the fine, and not so fine, folks in Austin to their own BBQ? The anti-Texas folks have had their say, the pro-Texas folks have had theirs, and a whole mess of other random comments have been thrown in for good, and not so good, measure. That particular appaloosa is dead and picked clean, folks.
Let's keep them dogies movin'!
If anyone had anything else to talk about, presumably they would be talking about it.
If anyone had anything else to talk about, presumably they would be talking about it.
A fair point, but I do think that Texas discussion has sucked the oxygen out of other, more fruitful ones.
So I'll try to start a new one:
How actively supportive, understanding and hard-working have everybody's advisors and/or degree-granting department been in this market? Have they understood just how calamitous this particular job season has been? What actual support (adjuncting, etc.) have they offered to help get people through this year, and probably next?
This is one thing that really worries me. Are we in danger of losing a cohort or two of good people simply because they chose the wrong time to graduate? What can the field do to ameliorate this? Anything?
their sympathy only runs so deep - yes, we are in danger of losing a number of good people from the field ... this is true in all of the classical disciplines from where i sit - Greek/Latin, anc. history, and archaeology ... esp. true of people who have already moved beyond their PhD granting institutions and have no fallback position, employment-wise.
Let's supplement Tiger Tree's question. How supportive are the colleagues of folks post-PhD who so far are not getting far in this market? Post-PhD students are always more vulnerable in the job market; most grad programs will try to help ABDs and recent grads. with something, even adjuncting.
As for UT, as far as I can see, they've done nothing unprofessional this job search - unlike some other schools who have been mentioned on the next thread down.
Yeah, the discipline is headed in the right direction. We'll lose a cohort or two and the future sabretooths/evil villains who eat their young will represent all that much more (if these people with 5 flybacks exist, which I don't doubt).
As for UT, as far as I can see, they've done nothing unprofessional this job search
Hey! Stop breaking the truce!
Has anyone gotten any news on the Vandy job?
Hey! Stop breaking the truce!
So UT is under some kind of damnatio memoriae? Never to be mentioned?
So UT is under some kind of damnatio memoriae? Never to be mentioned?
Any speculation about the possible awesomeness or heinousness of UT invites a riposte from someone who disagrees. I'm just responding to the plea that we back off it for a while. I'm sure it'll come up again before long if people feel strongly about it.
Anybody else see the "Friends don't let Friends go to Grad School in the Humanities" post over at the Chronicle?
Here is a link to it, and a response. Long comment stream. Interesting. Depressing.
Here
Thank God I fall into category 2 of those who should pursue humanities degrees.
The conversation sure has flourished since we stopped talking about Texas.
Yeah, it's like avoiding politics and religion at a society soiree. What do you talk about, the weather?
Seriously, we need to sit quietly as the baby cubs from P-ford growl and people inexplicably defend the adult SB tigers...mmm...how about them Yankees?
I'm a Red Sox fan. Do your worst.
Your mama wears pinstripes.
OK, everybody all together now!
The Eyes of Texas are upon you,
All the livelong day,
The Eyes of Texas are upon you,
You cannot get away.
Do not think you can escape them,
At night or early in the morn,
The Eyes of Texas are upon you,
Till Gabriel blows his horn!
They're waaaaatching...
Your mama wears pinstripes.
Wow, that's below the belt.
Besides the damnatio memoriae, is FV just dead because people are busy with flyouts and negotiations?
Nah. We're just resting and preparing our ammunition for the next Big War.
I'm bored, so here's a thing. Does anyone have the feeling a search or two listed as t-t (not open rank) might in the end go senior? There are one or two department websites that have made me wonder.
I'm bored
Hmm... Go back to work?
There are one or two department websites that have made me wonder.
Yeah, which ones?
I'm not sure if it's the low number of jobs or the axing of jobs that's making people paranoid, but I think candidates are keeping things close to the vest more than ever before. I'm hearing rumors, so PLEASE update the wiki with offers extended if at all possible.
I'm bored
Hmm... Go back to work?
It's my work that's boring me. Never happened to you? Freak.
Which ones?
Texas, Brown...but I could be totally wrong. (Crap, I said the word. Sorry. White flag, white flag. I honestly did not mean this as an excuse to get that UT thing started up again - it's just an observation on their website, nothing to do with predatory felines.)
Only one person on the UT list could even be remotely described as a "senior scholar," and that person did not get tenure at another institution, which to me cancels the senior-ness.
UT lists a lot of talks from INVITED speakers. You may have confused those with the job talks.
How about this for a new topic: What is wrong with these schools that feel they must post their finalists on the web for all the world to see? Sure, it's inevitable that word gets around some, but it seems disrespectful to the candidates that these departments don't even try to show at least a little discretion.
I guess you get nine lives when you graduate with a H-bomb degree...
I'm also starting to see some fall 2009 courses get listed with a candidate's name, suggesting that they've accepted the position. I assume that this is unavoidable due to university policy? Perhaps you need a name with a course to make sure it is offered? Any seniors with admin experience know why?
What's so funny 'bout peace, love, and understanding?
Seriously, lay off the personal attacks, people. If you've ever learned anything from the classics, then try to start acting that way.
How about this for a new topic: What is wrong with these schools that feel they must post their finalists on the web for all the world to see? Sure, it's inevitable that word gets around some, but it seems disrespectful to the candidates that these departments don't even try to show at least a little discretion.
But it's not like schools are posting lists of finalists: they're posting events/talks, intended to advertise them to the university/Classics community they serve. They're NOT thinking that other candidates who didn't get the interview or the curious will be scouring their website looking for info. I frankly have no problem with such talks being advertised, and I haven't had any problem when I'm listed on an events calendar for a job talk.
Seriously, lay off the personal attacks, people. If you've ever learned anything from the classics, then try to start acting that way.
Hey, if we're going to take antiquity as our moral compass, then I would expect to see nothing but vicious personal attacks. Cicero? Attic oratory? Satire? Old Comedy? Historiography? Iamb?
I say this not to advocate vitriol, but as a reminder that there ain't much class in the classics. Seek your models of decorum elsewhere.
But it's not like schools are posting lists of finalists: they're posting events/talks, intended to advertise them to the university/Classics community they serve.
Right. Departments have never kept their public lectures secret. People who are not interested in knowing what public lectures will be offered are free to refrain from investigating the "Events" sections of department websites.
Hey, if we're going to take antiquity as our moral compass, then I would expect to see nothing but vicious personal attacks. Cicero? Attic oratory? Satire? Old Comedy? Historiography? Iamb?
You're all guilty of sleeping with Vestal Virgins, incest, taking bribes from the Macedonians, and breaking your engagements for nefarious reasons!
I'm also starting to see some fall 2009 courses get listed with a candidate's name, suggesting that they've accepted the position. I assume that this is unavoidable due to university policy? Perhaps you need a name with a course to make sure it is offered?
Each University has different policies, but it's well-known that courses without an instructor listed tend not to enroll well.
As for the person griping about job talks posted on events pages, if you're not one of the finalists, I honestly don't think it's your problem to deal with.
Adam Blistein, Jan. 6th, in the Dec. APA newsletter:
The recent troubles in financial markets have naturally had repercussions in the Classics job market, but for now at least, the number of positions available, while down from significantly from last year, is about the same as it was just three years ago. There is no way of knowing how many jobs will be posted after the annual meeting; so, at this time of the year, the best way to compare markets in different years is to look at the number of institutions conducting interviews at the annual meeting:
• Philadelphia (2009) 55
• Chicago (2008) 85
• San Diego (2007) 70
• Montreal (2006) 55
In my ten-year experience the Chicago and San Diego numbers were the outliers as the number of interviewing institutions was typically in the 55 to 65 range. Also, this year the number of candidates registered before the annual meeting was about the same as last year, after two consecutive years of substantial increases.
Discuss.
This is more or less what I thought was the case - the last two years have been *very* good on the market, but we're now returning to pre-2007 job levels. And of course, this is still better than the period 1980's-1990's. But one would like to know how many temp jobs interviewed at the APA - half of my interviews were with such schools.
In a recession education tends to stay flat, i.e., along with health care it's always in demand. But even health care is suffering now. And will Classics stay flat with the rest of education, or is it sufficiently marginal that it will suffer? We really won't know till next year whether the Classics market is in a lengthy downtick. And what's more important for most of us at this stage is how good the spring market in temp jobs will be.
Exactly, that's why it's not good enough just to have the number of universities interviewing. We need to differentiate between TT and non-TT jobs to have a better pulse on what's going on. We also need to provide a ratio between the number of TT jobs and the number of applicants (preferably with those already in TT positions left out).
It will surely get much worse for classics next year - 30 TT jobs? The sciences are treading water right now and will always get hefty grants. We have been treading water at best even during the recent surpluses so there will certainly be some setbacks with the recent downturn. I have no doubts that this recession, if it reaches its full potential, can permanently change the humanities/academic landscape as we know it in North America.
OK, Musketeers, I've done some counting on the wiki. Counting all institutions listed as interviewing at the APA, I get the following breakdown:
37 T-T positions (this includes some open-rank and senior positions; it does not include Swarthmore's mystery job)
22 temporary
Blistein's numbers are for institutions, so note I've counted schools with multiple positions (Gettysburg, Georgetown, Baylor, and The School That Must Not Be Named) multiple times - I'm counting jobs, not institutions.
Discuss.
There is no way of knowing how many jobs will be posted after the annual meeting; so, at this time of the year, the best way to compare markets in different years is to look at the number of institutions conducting interviews at the annual meeting.
Wow. It is now official. Adam Blistein is a moron. If this is the official APA line on this then we have no hope of getting useful info out of them. They are f&*@!*#g deluded.
The best way to compare markets is to, uhhh, compare markets. We can't get a complete handle on this market until around July, after the Spring jobs have closed. Comparing numbers of institutions signed up for the Placement Service is much too crude, and necessarily incomplete.
As mentioned above, the difference in TT jobs vs. non-TT jobs needs to be figured out. Also, I know of a few places which interviewed at the APA that are not continuing on with the search. So those "participating institutions" ought not to count at all. Finally, the Spring market looks like a complete bust so far. Much, much, much worse than in previous years.
I predict that this year will see a 30% drop in TT jobs offered (offered, not advertized - big difference!) from last year, and a 20% drop in jobs offered overall (TT and non-TT). Next year will continue this trend. To suggest, as I read Blistein's comments, that this year is merely a correction back to normal (pre-2007) betrays a serious lack of understanding.
If the APA is going to offer real leadership then they had damn well better be willing to be honest in their use of statistics.
I don't get pissed off easily, but Blistein has managed to do it.
"Also, I know of a few places which interviewed at the APA that are not continuing on with the search."
For those of us who are not privy to such knowledge but are desperate to know what's going on with some of these searches, can you tell us which places you're referring to?? (I assume you're talking about information that's *not* available on the wiki.)
I agree the numbers in that piece weren't terrifically meaningful. But then he didn't have much else to go on at that stage - it being well before Christmas, when the job market hadn't really happened yet and when a lot of institutions hadn't yet figured things out (why so late? - that's a whole different problem...). He could have written a searingly honest piece about not knowing anything and about how the whole t-t bubble might burst (not much of a bubble in the first place, more a sop), but executive directors of anything aren't paid to be disappointingly frank. That isn't an APA problem, however - it's systemic, perhaps even epidemic. Plus there's always the argument (which I'm ambivalent about) that depression and hysteria, however justified, don't help. But maybe I just enjoy being morose.
To suggest, as I read Blistein's comments, that this year is merely a correction back to normal (pre-2007) betrays a serious lack of understanding.
The question is, what is "normal"? I'm not trying to be difficult, but what is our baseline? Is there one? Is normal X amount of t-t jobs per year? Is "normal" the job markets of 10-20 years ago (much worse than even 5 years ago)?
As for institutions not going on with the search after an APA interview, someone mentioned on the next thread down that Hobart and William Smith might be one, but that's unconfirmed as far as I know. Institutions that are not expecting their searches to continue really need to alert interviewees.
The spring job market will be interesting. I keep hearing two theories: 1) it, too, will be bad, and below "normal," or 2) it will remain steady or be bullish because schools won't have the money for t-t track jobs but WILL have the money for temporary jobs. We'll probably know in a week or ten days, since the February ads tend to be a bellwether, but any thoughts or forehand knowledge?
I think a big problem is that once you get tenured or are in a relatively secure job like Blistein - i.e. those who are in a position to take action and rally the troops - you don't really give a damn. Yeah, you're exposed to it to a certainly degree through your students, but you have your hands full writing books and writing personal emails to each candidate. You *know* it's bad and maybe express some concern (and helplessness), but that's the extent of any action I've seen. I suspect once a number of us enter the TT stream, we'll be busy trying to swim up the current and spawn our careers also. In the meantime, the stream gets drier and drier...
I dunno...some of my recommenders have really gone to bat for me. But they are the exception, not the rule - there is a little bit of a "sink or swim, kiddo" mentality.
Does Blistein even have students?
Well, I think it's bloody ridiculous and a bit like an ostrich with its head in the sand. The president of the APA and AIA should be responsible for giving a state of the discipline address at least once a year. They should also have a top senior academic chair a committee concerned with the health of the discipline - make them a vice-president responsible only to the president. This should someone at the zenith of their career with some decanal or at least chair experience. There are bunch of these bigwigs around who have acheived pretty much all they can in the discipline - give them a new challenge. Pay or cajole their institution to give them something akin to decanal or editor-in-chief status in terms of course releases and whatnot. Honestly, I just don't get it.
As I peruse the shrieks of alarm at the state of the market and the field that comprise a sizable piece of the posts above, I wonder: as classicists, are we conditioned to read "decline and fall" into every data set we encounter?
...as classicists, are we conditioned to read "decline and fall" into every data set we encounter?
I've been wondering that myself. But I think some of the statistics offered above do suggest that this is a grim year. Looking at the wiki, 7-8 jobs have been canceled, which is way more than I can remember from the past few years.
I don't understand why some appear not to grasp that the APA and other similar professional organizations are basically impotent. You want a union or something, not the APA. And if you want the APA to be a powerful organization, your dues are going to have to be just a little bit higher than the pocket change you're currently throwing into the basket every year. And honestly, even in organizations that do have some power, forming a committee isn't a recipe for solutions. Maybe "somebody should do something," but to identify that "somebody" as "The American Philological Association" is fundamentally to misunderstand what that organization is and can do. It's also wildly to exaggerate the real-world power of even the biggest of our wigs—there's not one who has enough influence to save a single job outside her/his own institution.
And global warming is a myth. I guess classics is full of republicans? For once, the white man is in control!
For those of us who are not privy to such knowledge but are desperate to know what's going on with some of these searches, can you tell us which places you're referring to?? (I assume you're talking about information that's *not* available on the wiki.)
Yeah, sorry about that.
I am 90% sure that OSU-Newark, Georgia State, Emory, and Hobart are all finis.
Now, before the cries of outrage... I could be wrong. And I don't think we can expect to hear anything from these places until the fat lady sings. Who knows, maybe they'll pull the funding out of somewhere. Right now, however, it don't look good. I am also not an applicant to any of them, so this isn't some sly psych-out job.
I'll still lay down some anonymous, meaningless capital that says we don't see these four places make a hire this year.
This is just an EARLY synopsis, but when we look back I think we'll see an unusual bimodal timeline to how searches played out this year, explaining the hodgepodge documentation on the wiki.
I think a bunch of hires are already in the books - a number of institutions rushed to make sure they were approved before any second thoughts from the deans. This includes a number of internal candidates from my small sample set.
A number of other institutions are playing the waiting game either voluntarily or involuntarily due to the tenuous financial situation we're in. This is stretching some searches out longer than normal by a month - i.e. I think they will go into late March and maybe April.
So in the end, combined with the dearth of TT jobs, it's making for a rather dull February on here, which is usually when the contracts start getting signed in mass.
PLEASE, if a contract is signed, don't be bashful and update the wiki. While you're at it, post in the And There Was Much Rejoicing section of FV and we'll celebrate with you. This will have the added benefit of putting people out of their misery and let them start planning for the future.
I think you might be wrong about OSU-Newark. I was recently speaking to someone from OSU (Columbus) and the topic of that search came up briefly, and without mention of its having been called off. Sorry that I don't have anything more reliable than that.
I admit I don't know the OSU system all that well, but why would someone from another campus know the inner workings of a search, even if they are in the same state system? I mean, surely someone from SUNY-Buffalo has little reason to know what's happening at SUNY-Stonybrook.
The OSU satellites are not the same as a system like SUNY or CSU. They are "satellite" campuses that serve place bound adult learners or serve as feeders to the main campus--more like a junior college in CA. The search is being conducted by the Classics department on main campus in Columbus
Regardless, our experience on here has been that the rumor more often than not ends up being true, and a strong indicator of a position going belly up is when a faculty member strongly denies its imminent demise. Plus I would keep as many people in the dark as possible if I were a search chair. Why? plausible deniability
The only person I know who interviewed at OSU-Newark was told, by an OSU-Columbus faculty member, that he didn't get further than an APA interview, but no details about whether someone else had been invited to campus or what. Any other interviewees out there?
Plus I would keep as many people in the dark as possible if I were a search chair. Why? plausible deniability
Care to unpack this logic for us? Deniability of what, exactly? You wouldn't say anything till you were sure the administration had pulled the position, because you wouldn't want your candidates to write you off and take other positions, but once the position is gone, there's nothing I can see to be gained from keeping it a secret. You just blame your administration (correctly) for ending the search and apologize to those who were up for the job.
Exactly, that's why it's spurious to base the viability of a search on what a faculty member at that institution didn't say.
Exactly, that's why it's spurious to base the viability of a search on what a faculty member at that institution didn't say.
OK, but then what's with the sinister "plausible deniability" stuff?
This place has recently been long on the spleen but short on rumors.
C'mon folks! If you think that a job has been offered, say so; if the rumor is true, then you have brought us light; if untrue, where's the harm?
So did Michigan hire that last guy or what? The rest of us are still here waiting with absolutely no news whatsoever. Thanks a bunch.
What do you mean by "that last guy"?
Two friends and I, none of whom has previously mentioned this on the blog, were interviewed by OSU Newark. None of us has heard anything from them. On the other hand, I do know that they made a short-list at the convention.
So did Michigan hire that last guy or what? The rest of us are still here waiting with absolutely no news whatsoever. Thanks a bunch.
Well, as you should know, even if an offer has been made -- which almost certainly hasn't happened yet -- that offer would not have been accepted so quickly. So there probably won't be any real news on this one just yet. Since you almost certainly are not a candidate for the position, I suggest that you look for news elsewhere. Perhaps try the Drudge Report...
also interviewed for OSU-Newark, have also heard nothing.
Not OSU, but I know of at least two jobs that I heard were offered. Unfortunately, it's very preliminary and there was a big flap last year from the people who were offered the job when they were "outed" prematurely.
You shouldn't "out" anybody, but it is perfectly reasonable to say which jobs have been offered.
Second that...no names on the wiki at this stage, but if you have it on good authority that a job has been offered, please post it.
There is one TT position in NYC filled by someone already tenured at another institution. Don't kill the messenger...
To the Messenger:
Please post the dope on the wiki.
Exactly. If a job has definitely been offered, then of course that information should be posted, though without the name. After all, that's why this blog/wiki exists!
Do be sure to differentiate between offered and offered/accepted.
Well, as you should know, even if an offer has been made -- which almost certainly hasn't happened yet -- that offer would not have been accepted so quickly. So there probably won't be any real news on this one just yet. Since you almost certainly are not a candidate for the position, I suggest that you look for news elsewhere. Perhaps try the Drudge Report...
I'm just going to have to school you. A cttee vote can take place as soon as the last candidate has left town. So news (yes, fama) can be posted by someone in the know pretty much immediately. I don't know if there is any news, hence my question. But boy it must be a pleasure to feel as smart as you clearly are.
Not smart, just sounds like a member of the SC trying to nose in and exert control over a venue that isn't any of their business.
Wrong on both counts. So maybe you two aren't as clever as you think.
The exact question to which I was responding was "So did Michigan hire that last guy or what?" As people with at least some training in reading texts, I would have hoped you'd be bright enough to recognize the difference between the verb "hire" and the verb "offer." (Perhaps you need to see those written in Latin or Greek to take the time to analyze how they were used and what the authorial intent was?) No one has been hired by Michigan, and it would be unreasonable to expect someone to have been hired just over a week after the last candidate had visited. What I wrote is so obvious, frankly, that I almost didn't bother to respond. Whether an offer has been made I do not know, but I do know that no one has been hired.
Someone the other day was wondering why this site is short on information and long on "spleen." Here's part of the reason why: a lot of people, myself included, are turned off by the attitudes that so many people reveal when they can hide behind the cloak of anonymity. I know people who've stopped coming here simply because of all the negativity and hostility. Your two posts are yet another example of this, albeit a relatively minor one.
I know people who've stopped coming here simply because of all the negativity and hostility.
I know I stopped reading for a bit and mostly just peruse to check the wiki itself. It is a shame that the goings on here damage the use of the wiki since I think it is a good thing.
Dude asked about Michigan. You got all self-righteous. That's the story. If you want a reason why people don't come to this site, I believe someone said something about a plank and an eye.
Yeah, the average classics department (and internet forum) is no much friendlier and everyone passes out lollipops...snort. Who's living in the real world and who's in lala land, LMAO?
Latest spat aside, venom has nothing to do with this site not being used. There was plenty of action last year, much more cutting than anything on show this time round, but still people kept posting info. More tellingly, the Wiki's pretty bare (even accounting for fewer jobs). I guess the previous generation were more avid, and more fair-weather, with FV.
Dude asked about Michigan. You got all self-righteous. That's the story. If you want a reason why people don't come to this site, I believe someone said something about a plank and an eye.
The "dude" asked specifically about whether a certain candidate had been hired. The "dude" should have known that on this forum we do not out job recipients or discuss individuals. The "dude" should also have known that with at least one senior candidate in the mix it's probably not a simple matter of a departmental vote and an offer being extended right away. And there are other things that the "dude" should also have known, but I'm not spending more time on this. All in all, it was a question that should not have been asked, or at least not in that way.
This place has definitely become less populated once it became clear that sabretooths were prowling with their thinly-veiled threats laced with self-righteousness.
This is how I'd have answered the question re: Michigan.
"The situation is complicated because there are senior and junior candidates, though only senior candidates have been invited so far. If an offer is made, and I don't know that one has, I encourage someone to make that public, though with no names attached. Let's please try to keep the no names/identifications rule as strictly as possible."
Or alternatively I could have congratulated the original poster for not being a candidate and then mocked her/him for being a right-wing conspiracy theorist. Classy.
This place has definitely become less populated once it became clear that sabretooths were prowling with their thinly-veiled threats laced with self-righteousness.
Or maybe people are worried that paranoid delusion is contagious.
a question that should not have been asked
Er, what's the point of this blog again?
Paranoid? Have you been reading the ruler-tapping posts by senior scholars on here lately? I thought the main purpose of this blog was to make the entire classics job search process more transparent for CANDIDATES, individual departmental machinations be damned. When these ruler-tappers decry the openness made possible by anonymity, I interpret it as simply a ridiculous attempt to expand the authority of their pathetic classics fiefdom in an internet age. Welcome to the 21st century.
I actually can't tell anymore whether people are joking or not.
Paranoid? Have you been reading the ruler-tapping posts by senior scholars on here lately? I thought the main purpose of this blog was to make the entire classics job search process more transparent for CANDIDATES, individual departmental machinations be damned. When these ruler-tappers decry the openness made possible by anonymity, I interpret it as simply a ridiculous attempt to expand the authority of their pathetic classics fiefdom in an internet age. Welcome to the 21st century.
You're right, you're obviously not at all paranoid. I stand corrected.
When these ruler-tappers decry the openness made possible by anonymity, I interpret it as simply a ridiculous attempt to expand the authority of their pathetic classics fiefdom in an internet age.
Anonymous 4:59, was your comment referring to my statement that "a lot of people, myself included, are turned off by the attitudes that so many people reveal when they can hide behind the cloak of anonymity"? I hope so, because right now I'm sitting in an unnamed department's library -- since I don't have my own office at this point in my career -- grinning from ear to ear at how mistaken you are.
Back to checking on something in Robert Parker's "Miasma"...
I hope so, because right now I'm sitting in an unnamed department's library -- since I don't have my own office at this point in my career -- grinning from ear to ear at how mistaken you are.
AHA! That's exactly what an old sabretooth pretending to be a grad student would say!!1! Which only confirms my point.
/paranoid
Did we actually get any new info at the end of this 'discussion'? As rashly phrased as the first poster's question may have been, it was a question. And the same could go for any number of other searches. Why is this year like wringing blood from a stone? Astonishingly, some people even seem complicit with the idea of not spreading rumors. (So why not just keep quiet?) I don't think this blog is policed (like some) or offensive (like others); thanks to dereliction it's just become a bit useless.
Did we actually get any new info at the end of this 'discussion'?
Well, yes. That nobody who feels like sharing has any information about that search, even when specifically asked about it. If you really would like a different answer, though, I'm happy to provide one: "yes, that last guy was hired." I have no idea if it's true, but at least it's specific. Enjoy.
Really? My source tell me the first women was hired. Or was it the 3rd sabretooth?
What I would like some info on is the Swarthmore search(es). I know it's been mentioned in the past, but figured it was time to revisit this enigma of a situation. Anyone know anything? Anything at all?
My source tell me the first women was hired.
Interesting. You source not good English very speak?
In any case, I have it on good authority that all of the candidates were hired into that job and that they are all currently riding magical unicorns to Ann Arbor.
To find out whether you are one of those lucky candidates, follow these easy steps.
1. Look down.
2. Do you see a magical unicorn? (If "yes," continue to step 3; if "no," proceed to step 4.)
3. Hooray! (skip to step 5)
4. I'm very sorry.
5. The end
Okay, let's try this again...
Hey, does anybody happen to know if a formal offer was made by Michigan for the open rank Latinist/Roman History position?
If so, any details at all would be appreciated. If you don't know, please don't feel any pressure to weigh in!
Thanks!!
Interesting. You source not good English very speak?
In any case, I have it on good authority that all of the candidates were hired into that job and that they are all currently riding magical unicorns to Ann Arbor.
To find out whether you are one of those lucky candidates, follow these easy steps.
1. Look down.
2. Do you see a magical unicorn? (If "yes," continue to step 3; if "no," proceed to step 4.)
3. Hooray! (skip to step 5)
4. I'm very sorry.
5. The end
Congratulations on being a jerk. Responses like this are leading people to quit using the wiki. Which is too bad, because I've been on the market with and without the wiki, and I can assure you that it is much better when this site functions as it should and we cooperate instead of picking each other apart.
Congratulations on being a jerk. Responses like this are leading people to quit using the wiki. Which is too bad, because I've been on the market with and without the wiki, and I can assure you that it is much better when this site functions as it should and we cooperate instead of picking each other apart.
Hear, hear!!
Look, if you don't think sites like these are useful, please don't use them. Nobody is holding a gun to your head. There are a bunch of us who are actually interested in helping each other. Please take your snark, your childish pettiness, and your deliberately obtuse and uncharitable responses elsewhere. They just aren't wanted here.
This process is enough of a pain in the ass as it is. It'd be nice not having to deal with anonymous jerks who can't seem to understand that the very purpose of this board and the wiki is to make a necessary evil more transparent and, hopefully, a little less stressful.
Capice?
To everybody else, who actually want to be helpful and supportive:
Don't Feed The Trolls!
Responses like this are leading people to quit using the wiki.
I hardly ever come to FV and I hardly ever post, because of the tone. But it doesn't stop me from using the wiki. In fact, by our counter more people are using the wiki than last year. FV doesn't endanger the wiki; FV endangers FV, possibly because FV is not as obviously useful as the wiki, when most of the posts are part of some debate, and questions about jobs (like the Swarthmore one) often go unanswerered.
And since FV can be read by anyone on the internets, who knows what it's doing to Classics's reputation? One of my senior colleagues reads it occasionally, and said it always gives him the impression that the field is degenerating rapidly and everyone (especially MC people) is unhappy. Do we really want some dean to find this and view our internecine contemplations of the Death of Classics? (Extreme case, I know, but I'm trying to get a point across.) Last year we go some kind of politeness mention, and I'm sure we're still not as bad as the philosophers or whoever it was, but it'd be nice to do that again.
What I would like some info on is the Swarthmore search(es).
What you'll probably get is a pile of condescension and a lecture on minding your own business. (Though I hope someone has something better for you.)
On another note, the Wiki is for definite news, FV is for rumors. I thought the Latin made that distinction clear, but I guess one can't assume anything these days.
Re Michigan's hire: I have it on good authority that they've extended an offer to an older gentleman, who has written mostly about the French, and wars, and generally works best in groups of three. Michigan is hoping to make it a dynastic hire, since the gentleman in question has a well-qualified great-nephew whom the department expects will be terrific negotiating with administrators. Both men are interested in striking their own coinage, which the state of Michigan sorely needs. Neither owns a unicorn, however.
Re Michigan's hire: I have it on good authority that they've extended an offer to an older gentleman, who has written mostly about the French, and wars, and generally works best in groups of three. Michigan is hoping to make it a dynastic hire, since the gentleman in question has a well-qualified great-nephew whom the department expects will be terrific negotiating with administrators. Both men are interested in striking their own coinage, which the state of Michigan sorely needs. Neither owns a unicorn, however.
Heh heh heh!
Awesome.
"And since FV can be read by anyone on the internets, who knows what it's doing to Classics's reputation? One of my senior colleagues reads it occasionally, and said it always gives him the impression that the field is degenerating rapidly and everyone (especially MC people) is unhappy. Do we really want some dean to find this and view our internecine contemplations of the Death of Classics? (Extreme case, I know, but I'm trying to get a point across.) Last year we go some kind of politeness mention, and I'm sure we're still not as bad as the philosophers or whoever it was, but it'd be nice to do that again."
Yes'm, we's MC folks will be keeping our trap shut from now on so wes can be telling da world how great we's been treated by you nice folks.
I initially thought there were a whole bunch of troubled, snarky people on FV this year -- but I am coming to see that it's pretty much one troubled snarky person (see above) and that we shouldn't take his/her bait.
Kudos to the folks who have recently posted on the wiki about jobs getting offered.
Last year I was struck when comparing the comments on FV with the comments posted on the wikis in larger fields such as Philosophy and English by how generous and constructive the discussion here was, as opposed to the paranoia and hostility towards peers expressed there. It looks as though perhaps it is market conditions that produce such behaviour given that supportive collegiality has diminished greatly on FV this year at about the same rate that jobs have been cancelled. Though I must say English has veered towards supportive collegiality. Perhaps that comes when you fully comprehend that thanks to the financial crisis you have better odds of winning the lottery than landing a tenure track job.
Being generous and supportive of your peers, sharing information, and giving sage advice will not diminish your chances of getting the job you want. Seriously. If you are good at what you do and have managed to get an on campus interview, don't screw yourself by failing to keep unusual personal tics under control. Assume, however, that everyone else with an on campus interview is as qualified and decent as you are - as were many of the people who applied for the job and were not shortlisted. Keep in mind that some of us who are monitoring FV and the wiki are on the verge of watching their dreams for their future career crumble. If you think people are out to get you, I recommend you stop feeding your paranoia on FV, go buy yourself a large supply of tinfoil and start lining your office/bedroom/cubicle.
For everyone else: be supportive, be generous in your assumptions about your peers and future/current colleagues. It will buoy the spirits of those on the market, knowing that if they are so fortunate as to get an academic job, t-t or otherwise, that the people they are going to be working with are more likely to offer to read a draft of an article for them than try to push them down the stairwell so as to increase their share of the money in the department travel fund.
PS Tiger Tree -- I missed you. I am glad to see you are still about. I hope you have many interviews. Your posts make me think you are someone that I would enjoy having as a colleague.
it's pretty much one troubled snarky person (see above)
Sorry to disappoint, but I'm fairly troubled and snarky and I didn't write that post.
Anyone have news from Loyola Maryland?
PS Tiger Tree -- I missed you. I am glad to see you are still about. I hope you have many interviews. Your posts make me think you are someone that I would enjoy having as a colleague.
My ideal department would have both Tiger Tree and Poldy in it. That department would be totally kick-ass.
Poldy, where are you?
Yes'm, we's MC folks will be keeping our trap shut from now on so wes can be telling da world how great we's been treated by you nice folks.
The original poster was quoting someone. The question is not whether it's true, but whether that's the impression readers get. And is that the kind of impression we want to convey? Your comment does not advance the discussion.
"PS Tiger Tree -- I missed you."
Get a room...I thought the rendevous was already set up for Philadelphia.
"PS Tiger Tree -- I missed you."
Get a room...I thought the rendevous was already set up for Philadelphia.
Um...whoever posted that wasn't the one who set up the rendezvous for Philly, which was moi. It was everything we both had dreamed of. But now you say s/he* is cheating on me?!
*Hey, it was dark. Hard to tell.
Poldy's incessant "toodle pip" got very old. Me, I'd rather be colleagues with our MC friend who does dialects.
I want to be friends with the Princeford villain. He could probably finagle me a job as a junior grade sabretooth tiger.
Poldy's incessant "toodle pip" got very old. Me, I'd rather be colleagues with our MC friend who does dialects.
Un-PC dialects, too. How edgy!
Is our next big fight going to be over Poldy's "toodle pip"? (I kinda liked it.)
Repressed, un-pc talk - that's my gig!
Poldy's "toodle-pip" got old
In that case, tinkerty tonk. (And I mean it to sting.)
I just updated the wiki; the Toronto job (T-T Latin lit) has been offered and accepted.
hey, check it - Michigan did offer a job. But was it to that last guy???
Hah! I was right! The wiki reports that OSU-Newark's search is still alive. I wrote last week that I had reason to believe it was, but there were doubters (not to mention one or two rather silly comments in response). But it looks like I was right after all.
That'll teach you to believe what anonymous people on the internet tell you!
Miami?
yes, as in Coral Gables and football, not "fake" Miami in "fake" Oxford in real Ohio. Anyone have a clue what's going on there? They phone interviewed. They conference interviewed. They had some fly-outs. They canceled other fly-outs.
Has the line gone dead?
Is this thing on?
SECONDED. (Re: Curious about Miami)
To whomever posted on the wiki: how did you find out that one of the searches was canceled? And do you have any information on the profile of the search that's still alive? I've heard nothing since a conference interview.
Miami has a strange way of doing searches -- bizarre, in fact. Don't hold your breath waiting for information, or courteous treatment in general.
Well, I am very glad that the OSU-Newark position seems to be on, and that I was wrong in my doomsday prediction for it!
But the lesson learned isn't to distrust anonymous sources of info. After all, I signed my own pseudonym to the prediction. Don't slander the poor anonymous folks. They are a different breed altogether!
Even though I didn't receive a campus interview I have been very impressed with how Miami has handled their search process. Good communication, very nice search chair, and a very transparent process. Not sure why you are complaining...
Strange is such a relative term. My roommate thinks the entire classics search apparatus is strange. He couldn't believe that we conference interview and flyout candidates for 1-year VAPs at podunk colleges. He thinks the entire courtship-like process is strange. He looked over my list of common APA interview questions and thought the entire thing esoteric and quaint.
Forgot to mention that my roommate is ABD in the sciences.
"Even though I didn't receive a campus interview I have been very impressed with how Miami has handled their search process. Good communication, very nice search chair, and a very transparent process. Not sure why you are complaining..."
How do we know that you're not a SC member? I don't even have my tinfoil hat on and I'm suspicious.
Even though I didn't receive a campus interview I have been very impressed with how Miami has handled their search process. Good communication, very nice search chair, and a very transparent process. Not sure why you are complaining...
A joke, right?
Either a joke or a newbie.
I think professionalism is a relative term in classics, and academia in general even.
NYU-Gallatin?
And how about Gallatin? They interviewed candidates in mid-December. It's now mid-February...
I know the rest of the world uses the DD.MM.YY format, but I can see some wiki confusion in the future for dates listed as 3.2.09. Just an observation.
NYU-Gallatin?
And how about Gallatin? They interviewed candidates in mid-December. It's now mid-February...
No clue. They asked me for more materials after they had started campus visits. Haven't heard anything since.
Same with me. My guess is that they've made an offer to someone, but that person is being considered elsewhere. So it could still be a while before we know something...
Anon. 5:49-
Thanks for the update re: Gallatin. Makes sense!
More on Gallatin
Here's a question - did anyone who was asked for additional materials after they had already interviewed a number of candidates in mid-December subsequently get an interview? I know {men} a number of people who were interviewed in the first [and only?] round and a number of people who were asked for additional materials after that first round had happened. I don't know {de} a single person who was interviewed after that first round.
I feel as if, given the market, a lot of schools are getting a real sense of what's out there, who's available-- which is fine, of course. EXCEPT that it gets a lot of candidates' hopes up unnecessarily, and then we all wallow in this limbo (purgatory?) of not having information as to what's going on in the search, where we stand, whether they were just "window shopping" with our additional materials, and so on.
The thing about Gallatin is that there are a number of factors than many searches do not have. First, it's in Manhattan. Combined with the economy, this will lead to a remarkably deep pool of candidates. Second, it's truly an interdisciplinary program. So the SC probably has a member or two from Gallatin, one from Classics, Anthro, Art History, History, etc. It is guaranteed to be a hydra-like beast pulled in all directions. In the end, this will lead to senior candidates really standing out. There will be a bunch wanting to move to NY and they've had the chance to take their research in non-traditional directions that junior candidates have not had the time or luxury to develop. Can junior candidates succeed? Sure, but it will at best be similar to an open search at top institutions. I put by money on a senior scholar currently in a solid if not elite program who is a bit funky as defined by traditional classics.
I often object to the bitter tone of the blog — there are after all, a lot of us and not many jobs, so things are bound to be or seem unfair. But it seems that a more cynical view of the Gallatin situation is possible. There is only one Classicist at Gallatin. She also teaches in a certain graduate department. The ad reflected rather strongly the interests of people in that department. So it might have been written to allow her to hire someone from it. So....I'm not sure I would bet on someone senior.
Gallatin & co
There is only one Classicist at Gallatin. She also teaches in a certain graduate department... written to allow her to hire someone from it.
A lot of subjunctives and speculation. I have nothing to do with that "certain graduate department", and I am not at Gallatin either, BUT I have looked at both of them seriously for various reasons.
Gallatin is a special chimera in this field: multidisciplinary and theoretical to an extreme. It's not a surprise that they drew their senior Classicist from that "certain department", which is also an exemplum of interdisciplinary and theoretical studies. If a candidate therefrom does get the Gallatin job, I wouldn't be surprised - nor would i necessarily call foul play & nepotism.
If you have ever looked at Gallatin seriously, you will notice immediately that 95% of graduate programs in American (probably more, and probably not just in America) simply don't prepare candidates for that sort of cross-pollinating, theory-head atmosphere.
At the end of the day, we are still left with these subjunctives; for, as with the Miami search, we are simply speculating. This is all fama, and we're taking solace in each other's conjectures.
This is all fama, and we're taking solace in each other's conjectures.
Sorry to repeat another poster's memo, but have you read the title of this blog? Or have you accidentally wandered in from Certa Volent?
Sorry to repeat another poster's memo, but have you read the title of this blog? Or have you accidentally wandered in from Certa Volent?
Chill, dude. It's called confirmation.
The problem is, it's not a rumor. It's a theory, and a pretty dumb one at that. It's not based on anything, and it's a pretty flimsy basis for implying that unnamed sole classicist at Gallatin is somehow running a sham search single-handedly.
The problem is, it's not a rumor. It's a theory, and a pretty dumb one at that.
Yeah, but my point - perhaps I should have spelled it out - was that the person made it pretty clear it was just a conspiracy theory. They said it was a cynical, possible view. They didn't need a lecture. As long as people acknowledge that this is their crazy two cents' worth, aren't we all adult enough to let them have their say and draw our own conclusions?
Personally, I can't think of anyone who fits the Gallatin posting AND the school itself. I guess they want someone capable of writing something like "The Corrupting Sea," but with less fact and more abstract thought?
Looking over their faculty, I get the impression that they can prepare artists and actors, but their students will come away knowing little about how the world really works. History, economics, politics, etc. are not represented the way they would be at a normal school. (If ever Anne Hathaway becomes an activist I'll know I can ignore her; Natalie Portman at least went to Harvard and might have something worthwhile to say...)
For you veteran MCers out there, what do you make of the market this year? I know it's generally craptastic, like every other discipline, but qualitatively speaking, is it common to have such a dichotomous offering, at least to my eyes?
The positions either seem to be at elite schools (usually for senior candidates) or at low end schools. Where are all the MC jobs from excellent schools that aren't elite? i.e. flagship or near flagship state schools and solid SLACs?
It really is a job "dump". That's it for Feb.?
Yeah, I was surprised by the February ads. But IIRC last year's Feb. ads were thin as well; the VAP I ended up getting wasn't advertised till March 15, I think.
While we're on the subject of NYU-related institutions, does anyone know if anyone has heard from the Institute for the Study of the Ancient World about their 2009-10 fellowships? It's been 2+ months since the deadline, so presumably they'll be reaching a decision soon, if they haven't already.
Re: ISAW
I wouldn't hold your breath. Just as you need to know the Chalcock at the JIAAW, you really need to be a part of a "family" network at the ISAW to have a solid chance. It's possible as an outsider, but like said, don't hold your breath.
Agreed, I think the more financially independent an institute, the more power there is concentrated in a few people with little meddling by the university. This is especially true with new institutes trying to get off the ground.
Okay, points taken... But does anyone actually know what stage their search is at?
What stage? The lunch stage. I would say that a Columbia alum is sidling up to the director at an outdoor cafe in Manhattan reminiscing until the alum says, "You know, I have this fantastic student that has rockstar branded on his head..."
ISAW
Now that ISAW is on its feet and running, I would be quite surprised if any Columbia alumni get fellowship offers there.
Of course there was plenty of time to hurl accusations openly at the director during the Q/A session of the APA's Presidential panel. He was quite open about the format and direction of the institution that January evening in Philadelphia.
All that said, you may want to check the intellectual "rock-star" credentials of past CU alumni who have done time at ISAW. Yes, you too may be impressed! and perhaps even cool it with the conspiracy theories (even if the whole point of "famae volent" is apparently to promote such).
Hey, if I'm quick enough I'll be the one posting #1000 in this thread.
I was! The rest of the world can bite my shiny, metal a**.
Post a Comment