Quote:
|
Originally Posted by demonrail666
I can't disagree with a single thing in this post. Not a thing.
I teach at a university and while I hope that I'm one of the 'good' lecturers, the system in which I operate makes it very difficult for me to move beyond the banality of set 'readers' and theoretical orthodoxies.
My time is taken up on pointless bureaucracy and 'putting my ideas out there' via the conference circuit - which amounts to little more than an excuse to 'network'.
Good students struggle because their enthusiasm for the subject is hampered by an overly rigid course structure and a lack of willingness on the part of the department to wander outside of its ideological comfort-zone.
What is promoted instead is a kind of intellectual mediocrity, twinned with a desire to borrow ideas and frameworks from disciplines that rarely have much in common with what is meant to be studied. (I teach Art History, but to read my lectures you'd think I was dealing in some kind of bastardised hybrid of philosophy, sociology and cultural studies.)
The consequence of this is that students often leave an Art History degree well versed in the theories of Foucault, Deleuze and Lacan, but can't see anything in a Jackson Pollock besides some random splashes. They'll half digest some vogueish terms ('difference' is one that just won't go away) but are at a complete loss when actually confronted with a piece of art.
Someone might be very lucky and find themselves in a decent department, but they'll be just that: very lucky.
In the past two years I've known two lecturers that have suffered nervous breakdowns. Both of these were very good at what they did but found the sheer banalaity of the structure in which they were expected to operate ultimately impossible. Alcoholism amongst lecturers is also rife (I think we're just one notch below doctors in that respect).
So if i take issue with anything in your otherwise spot-on post, it's that there are some excellent lecturers out there. Unfortunately they work within a system that either forces them to conform or else destoys their spirit enough to make them leave, either through resignation or as the consequence of a breakdown.
Crap, isn't it.
|
Out of curiosity, how old are you? Well no, I don't really care how old you are. What I mean is, how well into that career are you? I'm going to be getting my B.A. in May (English-Writing), and feel like I'm kind of being shoved into a movie-production career that I don't really want, just because it's easy to get into and may have an easy outlet for my writing.
I'd much rather set myself up for teaching at the college level, but all the advisors I talk to make it sound impossible before getting a doctorate. I'm going to go for one, in time, but I'd like to go out and get into the field (and, well, you know, make some actual money to pay stuff off) in the meantime. I know I've had professors with B.A.s, though. In fact I wrote an article for the school paper defending a few amazing professors in this position that got a lot of positive feedback (and I think it helped one of them get a better position). However, I have no idea how they got the job in the first place and what I would need to do to follow.
Do you have any advice?