NationStates Jolt Archive

I was reading the other day and this gem surfaced in the Atlanta Urinal (Journal Constitution for the uninitiated). It made me think about how an academic must feel after many years of service to a university.

Congratulations, monied America: You wanted your gated communities to keep out the poor, to protect yourselves from crime, to separate yourselves from undesirables. You took the high roads and built your gated communities on them so you would stay dry and clean while the stormwaters of filth and despair flooded their neighborhoods.
You did it. You kept out the poor, you concentrated the crime in the poor neighborhoods, effectively ensuring those neighborhoods would remain poor and broken. You separated yourselves from the undesirables.
And then you left them, to die in attics and on rooftops and in the streets and in the disgusting halls of commerce and sports. The richest nation in the world is the most destitute when it comes to true moral goodness. God could not bless this America at all.
SAM MARIE ENGLE

I called up one of my former colleagues that is still teaching and talked to him about this syndrome where a prof needs to speak out against any and all injustices as if they were the apocalypse. We talked about how universities attract people that are good at school. It's easy to get A's for them and that leads to more degrees and probably a teaching position. They aren't necessarily good at what they do, but it's easy for them. Facing and overcoming a challenge is what keeps most of us non-academics interested in working. The lack of a challenge is a good reason to move on.

Most of these tenured folks won't do that. They are 'safe' in their positions. But the mediocre ones are unhappy. I suspect that, as time goes by, they see classmates that earned B's doing very well in both material and emotional terms. They realize their students are unappreciative. The important books they imagined don't get written.

Then the jealosy sets in. The attitude I've seen is that "I'm smart, I should have those things". This is not the way a 'just' society would treat a learned teacher. I think this is where they either slide into a deep melancholy or they become very vocal opponents of any social injustice they see, convinced that their own under-appreciation is proof of the injustice of America.

We have a mutual acquaintance that fits another category. He is 'so smart' that he thinks he is avant-garde. He has quit talking about his students. They must not be that important. He directs every conversation to his garden. A bonsai garden, of course. And yes, he has a short beard, ponytail, jeans, and 'Birkenstocks'.

So when I see something like this in the paper, I scan it quickly, dismiss it as another manifestation of the same academic malcontent, and pass on. It's a good lesson to remember the next time you see a headline that some researcher at a university has discovered something--don't react until you can check the validity of the data.

So are you saying that all criticisms of our society and class system coming from academics is simply inspired by jealousy? Don't you think that maybe they're seeing a genuine injustice and trying to call attention to it?

So are you saying that all criticisms of our society and class system coming from academics is simply inspired by jealousy? Don't you think that maybe they're seeing a genuine injustice and trying to call attention to it?
Sure. I've generalized, but I think it's a fair one. Most folks don't have a real clear idea of who's teaching at universities. I think you need to read letters like Sam's with a grain of salt. Today the cause is the 'thousands' of dead in New Orleans, tomorrow it will be back to global warming. On Friday, there may be a new cause to champion.

School is a challenge. I don't get all As. I haven't gotten all As since 5th grade. I got Bs in High School and I am getting Cs and Ds now. However, I would rather get a D in a class in which I learned much than to get an A in a class were I learned nothing. I am not rich, my family struggles to make ends meet, but some jobs require a good College education, and that is were my dreams take me.

To say that all academics are bitter, sad people who only care about the world and others because they are discontented with their own lives is just a ridiculously far fetched way of justifying ignoring what they are saying. Just because you don't like being made to feel uncomfortable about your own consumerism and elitism (which none of us do), doesn't mean they are wrong.

Another resentment of mine is the sweeping generalisation that all academics champion causes. Many are selfish and self involved, or only truly care about one small, specific area of one discipline that happens to be their speciality.

The stereotyped birkenstock wearer who cares too much may be easy to hate, but sometimes we have to listen to them if we want the world to work better.

Teaching affords you the opportunity to see a great many things which are infuriating. I found this to be far more true at the secondary level than university level.

Teachers tend to bottle up a lot of anger when they see how stupid the average person is. Not the average "Look there is a person standing alone" person, but rather the average "Look there is a person standing with many others."

As a teacher/mentor, I have always strived to force people to stand on their own, and form opinions on their own, based on logical reasoning and independant information gathering. When people refuse to do that, it's easy to get angry.

Either way, who gives a damn if Sam is bitter, or not. Is the point made valid? Don't be a sheep.

Teaching affords you the opportunity to see a great many things which are infuriating. I found this to be far more true at the secondary level than university level.

Teachers tend to bottle up a lot of anger when they see how stupid the average person is. Not the average "Look there is a person standing alone" person, but rather the average "Look there is a person standing with many others."

As a teacher/mentor, I have always strived to force people to stand on their own, and form opinions on their own, based on logical reasoning and independant information gathering. When people refuse to do that, it's easy to get angry.

Either way, who gives a damn if Sam is bitter, or not. Is the point made valid? Don't be a sheep.
I quit teaching at Georgia Tech when my contract expired. I was an adjunct prof for 5 years. I didn't have any desire to go through the political process to get tenure and I realized that research was more fun than teaching. I also realized that researching for a commercial company that granted stock options was much better than doing it for the relatively low pay that academia offers one.

My original post was just a thesis. I don't especially care about Sam. We could pick Sam's letter apart, but that's not the point. It was just a catalyst that solidified some thoughts I had already been forming into an general idea. Sam is actually an administrator at Emory University. But between my pal and I and a few Margaritas, we developed the theory of the Academic Malcontent. I know it's a generalization, but I think it fits a substantial number of people that have sought refuge in colleges across the world.

I had thought this might be a good topic for discussion, but I guess it hasn't caught on.

Then the jealosy sets in. The attitude I've seen is that "I'm smart, I should have those things". This is not the way a 'just' society would treat a learned teacher. I think this is where they either slide into a deep melancholy or they become very vocal opponents of any social injustice they see, convinced that their own under-appreciation is proof of the injustice of America.
I've felt the same way those profs do sometimes, but it hasn't turned me into a lunatic raving about the "injustices" in America.

We talked about how universities attract people that are good at school. It's easy to get A's for them and that leads to more degrees and probably a teaching position.

Hmm, we must be in radically different fields.

In what I do, getting A's is not nearly enough. One must also work hard to publish in respectable peer-reviewed journals, and to publish books that will be noticed. Academics really have two jobs: we teach, which poses challenges in itself, and we are also expected to produce "original" and useful ideas.

Of course, if you just get good grades you will probably be able to produce a doctoral dissertation... and you may get an adjunct job. But the tenured faculty are, in my experience, highly motivated and talented people.

But the mediocre ones are unhappy.

Maybe. But in my experience, the mediocre academics are the least likely to engage in public debates or challenge social norms.

I suspect that, as time goes by, they see classmates that earned B's doing very well in both material and emotional terms.

Oh, you "suspect", do you? Well, that doesn't get us very far.

On the other hand, it is true that most of us academics could be making more money in other pursuits. But we choose not to, and -- in my experience -- we make that choice because we find that academia provides benefits that could never be outweighed by "more money." Engaging in the production of knowledge is a reward in itself... as is engaging young minds.

They realize their students are unappreciative.

If that's true, then they can't teach, and they should find something else to do with themselves. In my latest class however, my students lined up on the last day to shake my hand and thank me for opening their minds to new perspectives.

And yes, I am one of those complaining academics about whom you worry.

The important books they imagined don't get written.

I suspect we all have some goals we fail to attain.

Then the jealosy sets in. The attitude I've seen is that "I'm smart, I should have those things". This is not the way a 'just' society would treat a learned teacher.

How bizarre.

See, as an academic -- with plenty of friends and colleagues in academia -- I find that quite the reverse is true. While we may not make as much as some businesspeople, we generally find our lives to be pretty cushy... We make a decent enough salary, to a large extent we set our own schedule, we get summers off unless we want to make some extra money teaching, and we occasionally get a year or more off from formal duties to think and write another book. Depending on the school, we may get reimbursed conference or research trips to destinations all over the globe. (For the last few years my partner and I have spent a week in Hawaii each January, fully paid by our employers.)

Thus, if you want to look for a "psychological" motive in our social critique, in my experience it is more likely to be a kind of guilt than any sort of resentment. We wonder why a society rewards us so well "just for being smart," while people that -- from our point of view -- work as least as hard as we do are suffering in poverty, not to mention alienating conditions of work.

Jealousy? Hardly.

Also, did you and your friend really come up with this, or did you just decide people might listen to this nonsense better if you personalized it, rather than simply quoting your sources, e.g. Robert Nozick's essay "Why Do Intellectuals Oppose Capitalism?"

You can find that essay here. (http://www.cato.org/pubs/policy_report/cpr-20n1-1.html)

Just wondering.

So you are an ex-teacher starting a commotion about current teachers starting commotions about things?

Also, did you and your friend really come up with this, or did you just decide people might listen to this nonsense better if you personalized it, rather than simply quoting your sources, e.g. Robert Nozick's essay "Why Do Intellectuals Oppose Capitalism?"

You can find that essay here. (http://www.cato.org/pubs/policy_report/cpr-20n1-1.html)

Just wondering.
I can't speak for my friend, but I've honestly never heard of that essay. I don't spend much time reading CATO stuff, so I guess that's the reason. The similarities are really frightening. Maybe not that frightening, more comforting.

I quit teaching at Georgia Tech when my contract expired. I was an adjunct prof for 5 years. I didn't have any desire to go through the political process to get tenure and I realized that research was more fun than teaching. I also realized that researching for a commercial company that granted stock options was much better than doing it for the relatively low pay that academia offers one.

I see no real thesis here, beyond the generalized, over-used, and very, very old 'Ivory Tower' claim. I'd actually like to start a debate on why this notion that somehow academics live apart from 'the real world' (wherever the hell THAT is). I think it might be more of a two part reaction, anger over teacher control in school, and the notion that thinking for a living is somehow less work than using your back. I also challenge the idea that academics are somehow jealous of real world workers. Why should they be? Universities are usually the ones providing the large leaps forward in a varity of fields. They provide a space where groups of like minded individuals come together and work. Most academics I know are so focused on their fields that they usually don't register what's going on outside of it.

Of course it could also be just being annoyed that a university professor's word caries far more weight than the average Joe. Maybe because physical achivements mean less and less through the years as your body wears down, but the mind grows? Or maybe it is due to the fact that after it's all said and done, the professor at a university will be remembered more, than the faceless researcher at a corperation.

But please get a new line, Chaucer was writting the same stuff over 600 years ago.

So you are an ex-teacher starting a commotion about current teachers starting commotions about things?
Yeah, don't you like to stir things up once in a while?

[cut]
See, as an academic -- with plenty of friends and colleagues in academia -- I find that quite the reverse is true. While we may not make as much as some businesspeople, we generally find our lives to be pretty cushy... We make a decent enough salary, to a large extent we set our own schedule, we get summers off unless we want to make some extra money teaching, and we occasionally get a year or more off from formal duties to think and write another book. Depending on the school, we may get reimbursed conference or research trips to destinations all over the globe. (For the last few years my partner and I have spent a week in Hawaii each January, fully paid by our employers.)

Thus, if you want to look for a "psychological" motive in our social critique, in my experience it is more likely to be a kind of guilt than any sort of resentment. We wonder why a society rewards us so well "just for being smart," while people that -- from our point of view -- work as least as hard as we do are suffering in poverty, not to mention alienating conditions of work.

Jealousy? Hardly.
I have a physics degree, taught in that department and now do R&D in control systems development. Not as glamorous as my friend who also has a physics degree, but tries to prove that cold fusion is happening. I liked the material benefits of commercial practice and consulting; he prefered the benefits that the University system offered.

I suppose the type that we both identify as a malcontent come from our tenure on the academic senate. I think most appointees, from the sciences and engineering anyway, are reluctant and just do the business that is required. Every so often, there are a few profs that seem to have a cause. Not normal causes like better service from public works, but weird ones.

The one that sticks out most in my mind was a math prof that wanted to ban the Georgia Tech fight song because it promoted drinking. "I'm a Ramblin' Wreck from Georgia Tech' has been around as long as time. I asked around about how long she had been on the Senate and the answer was 'for as long as anyone can remember'. Those are the types that drove us to the discussion that I shared with y'all. That and a couple Margaritas.

I was reading the other day and this gem surfaced in the Atlanta Urinal (Journal Constitution for the uninitiated). It made me think about how an academic must feel after many years of service to a university.

I called up one of my former colleagues that is still teaching and talked to him about this syndrome where a prof needs to speak out against any and all injustices as if they were the apocalypse. We talked about how universities attract people that are good at school. It's easy to get A's for them and that leads to more degrees and probably a teaching position. They aren't necessarily good at what they do, but it's easy for them. Facing and overcoming a challenge is what keeps most of us non-academics interested in working. The lack of a challenge is a good reason to move on.

Most of these tenured folks won't do that. They are 'safe' in their positions. But the mediocre ones are unhappy. I suspect that, as time goes by, they see classmates that earned B's doing very well in both material and emotional terms. They realize their students are unappreciative. The important books they imagined don't get written.

Then the jealosy sets in. The attitude I've seen is that "I'm smart, I should have those things". This is not the way a 'just' society would treat a learned teacher. I think this is where they either slide into a deep melancholy or they become very vocal opponents of any social injustice they see, convinced that their own under-appreciation is proof of the injustice of America.

We have a mutual acquaintance that fits another category. He is 'so smart' that he thinks he is avant-garde. He has quit talking about his students. They must not be that important. He directs every conversation to his garden. A bonsai garden, of course. And yes, he has a short beard, ponytail, jeans, and 'Birkenstocks'.

So when I see something like this in the paper, I scan it quickly, dismiss it as another manifestation of the same academic malcontent, and pass on. It's a good lesson to remember the next time you see a headline that some researcher at a university has discovered something--don't react until you can check the validity of the data.


Very insightful.