Monday, 08 September 2008

Gigantic Favor

(This post will self-destruct shortly.)

Will some generous soul read over my Twain chapter for 1) typos and 2) egregiously stupid statements?*  I wouldn't ask, but I have to turn this thing in on Wednesday and have the editorial near-sightedness which comes from being too close to a text.  The chapter is barely this side of awful—fitful pacing, signposts everywhere, ghastly prose—but at this point I'm more worried about done than good.**  I'm trying to avoid this is all. 

You can download it here.  I found me a mensch.  If you would like to read it, send me an email.

*Cut-and-paste errors mostly: lack of transitions, re-introducing something already introduced, not introducing something I seem to be referring back to, &c.

**That's not false humility.  The chapter is truly awful for reasons which I could (and will in the future) describe.  But it is not good.  Nor is it representative of my work generally.  (In conception, maybe, but not in execution.)

Sep 8, 2008 8:22:46 PM | Dissertation

The comments to this entry are closed.

NEXT POST
You wouldn’t like me when I feign anger for rhetorical effect. (x-posted.) (Quick note: if you think someone is being self-congratulatory when he conjures up an image of himself with floaties, you may want want to have your tone-o-meter examined. Just saying.) I’ve a long history of wading into hostile waters without floaties and I’ve no intention to stop doing so, but if I ever did, it’d be because of statements like “I see no difference presently between the terms democrat and progressive.” Or claims that almost-imperceptibly-left-of-center candidates are socialist, communists, Marxists, &c. On the entire internet, this conceptual sloppiness is the only thing that ever threatens my equilibrium. Stupidity I can handle. Ignornace doesn’t bother. Willfully ignoring what I’ve said will only earn you my titular faux-Hulk. But play fast and loose with categories and you’ll piss me off so much I’ll have no choice but to ignore you. Revising my dissertation, I think I’ve come to understand why: in my “professional” life, that’s all I do. I define, re-define, pre-define, counter-define, retroactively define, retroactively re-define, retroactively pre-define, retroactively counter-define, &c. The dissertation has taught me to put items in proper boxes because almost no one will be able to tell when you don’t. Items and boxes entail a responsibility people who put Obama in the Marxist box (or Ayers in the Leninist box and Obama in the Ayers box) don’t understand, except unlike shifting London from the Darwin to the Spencer box, the actions of irresponsible bloviators have a measurable impact on our lives. Stuffing Palin in the feminist box allows a host of anti-feminists in as well, as evidenced by the past week of Republicans in deep dudgeon over the “sexist” attacks on the VP candidate. My metaphor, on the other hand, teeters on actual sexism, so I’ll stop while I’m behind. Wait, can’t stop there either. I don’t mean to say that there were no sexist attacks on Clinton, or that there haven’t been sexist attacks on Palin. I’m simply saying the hypocrites who crow about “sexist” attacks on Palin care not one whit about sexism per se — that is, had McCain not tapped Palin, conservatives would’ve avoid women’s issues for the forty-fourth Presidential election in a row.
PREVIOUS POST
"?" (x-posted.) Life-altering erudition in honor of Britney Spears of his day can be found here. I don't know about you, but I'm a changed man. (I should start a series.)

Scott Eric Kaufman

The Typepad Team

Search

Become a Fan

My Other Accounts

Recent Comments