close
The Wayback Machine - https://web.archive.org/web/20110430140759/http://www.michaelberube.com:80/index.php/weblog/comments/1480
Home | Away

Funky Nassau

As Sven notes in comment 29 of this most diverting thread, I’m on the road today.  I have to go to Hofstra and talk about stuff.  A train and a room and a car and a room and a room and a room, you know the drill.  But I wrote a bunch of new stuff just for the occasion.  If I had enough patience and/or energy I would say something snarky about Mark “let’s dynamize the university dynamically by abolishing tenure and creating dynamic undepartments of dynamism” Taylor or Andrew “why are professors writing books when they should be teaching?  I met a young man who wanted to write, and he made me mad, so we should abolish tenure. I had an onion in my belt, which was the fashion at the time” Hacker.  But I don’t, so this post-it will have to do.

Posted by on 09/28 at 11:34 AM

  1. The Hacker chap’s views are disheartening. But I’m glad he’s consistent enough not write books himself.

    Say hi from us to Couser if you see this message in time! He is nice.

    Posted by  on  09/28  at  02:31 PM

  2. Visitor clicker # 9550559. Less than 440 counter palindromes left. (Could be way off, ran out of fingers and toes.)

    Captcha: while. ~-ing away the time bomb’s ticks.

    Posted by  on  09/28  at  02:59 PM

  3. Hey guys, knock yourself out; I’ve got it from here.

    Posted by  on  09/28  at  03:27 PM

  4. I’m a prof. at Hofstra, and I want you to know that Mark Taylor’s name came up in an email exchange/ discussion about possible speakers a while back...I was soooo worried he’d end up being chosen, when lo and behold, the committee made an excellent choice after all!

    I should not have doubted my colleagues, I suppose. But you never know--Taylor and Andrew are great examples of people who get very far in academia in spite of the fact or because they maintain ridiculous positions.

    Posted by  on  09/28  at  04:01 PM

  5. I can say, with some 51% confidence, that some of the discussions around the quads will concern: the 90% confidence that the NRC has. in posting. that various data points put PhD programs along a spectrum of ranks, that ranges no less than six, nor more than ?, in two categories of ranking S and R. 

    Q. So what about the R-rankings?

    A. Those rankings are based indirectly on surveys of faculty members’ opinions of specific programs. Faculty members were asked to grade a sample of programs in their field on a scale of 1 to 6.

    Posted by  on  09/28  at  05:50 PM

  6. Well, we met, but you might have blinked. You were dining with various Deans and had a mouthful of “wrap.”
    I enjoyed your talk, but can’t make the panel. Thanks for coming!

    Posted by  on  09/29  at  02:07 PM

  7. I loved your talk, and agree with you about the function of the “universal”; I’ll be interested to see what my Hofstra colleagues make of it.

    A pointer you might find interesting, though I am in no way challenging your nerd cred and this may be redundant for you: there is a small movement towards more optimism in SF and I would say Jetse de Vries is rather its spokesman. His site Shine is as much for optimistic SF as for the anthology itself. I don’t think anyone went to see the Star Trek reboot thinking they were shelling out for a science fiction movie specifically; I think genre categories aren’t very useful when talking about popular stuff. But I think popular movies do have something to them other than dystopia and dystopia is a feature of a lot of speculative fiction so there’s a separation between the really popular movies and a movie embracing its SF niche and associated dystopia. Personally I think there’s a direct correlation between the negativity about the future of a work and its literary aspirations.

    Thanks again!

    Posted by Judith Tabron  on  09/29  at  03:00 PM

  8. At first I thought this - “creating dynamic undepartments of dynamism” - said creating dynamic *underpants* of dynamism.  Now *that* would be dynamic!

    Posted by Dr. Virago  on  09/29  at  06:02 PM

  9. Loved the obscure Beatles reference!

    Posted by  on  09/30  at  03:46 PM

  10. Well, we met, but you might have blinked. You were dining with various Deans and had a mouthful of “wrap.”

    When one dines with deans, Sven, it is always wise to keep one’s mouth full of “wrap.” Good to meet you for a nanosecond!

    Judith—thanks for the suggestion!  I’ll click the link once I hit “submit” on this thing.

    Dr. V.:  At first I thought this - “creating dynamic undepartments of dynamism” - said creating dynamic *underpants* of dynamism.  Now *that* would be dynamic!

    And profitable!

    Marcus:  Loved the obscure Beatles reference!

    I was wondering if it was a bit too obscure, even though we say that around my house all the name.  Turns out there’s a Facebook page by that name.  Of course.

    Posted by Michael  on  09/30  at  06:28 PM

  11. the committee made an excellent choice

    you’re welcome!

    Good to meet you

    Kind of you to say so. Few things make me want to run away screaming like a faculty luncheon at the club does.

    Posted by  on  10/01  at  09:34 AM

  12. How’s this for an ABF Friday

    You tube video of
    Baby Monkey (Going Backwards On A Pig) - Parry Gripp

    I would add the url but I am hopeless and would likely wreck the site!

    The monkey will ride the peeg!!!

    Posted by  on  10/01  at  11:23 AM

  13. hey you are thinking about the poor person. that is impressive. good opinion. Miami Limo

    Posted by carlos heaven  on  01/06  at  01:35 PM

  14. Thanks for sharing your expression! I enjoyed your thought Funky Nassau.
    Los Angeles Movers

    Posted by Los Angeles Movers  on  04/25  at  07:38 AM

Name:

Email:

Location:

URL:

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Submit the word you see below:


Next entry: ABF Friday: Mimesis Edition!

Previous entry: Counting down

<< Back to main