sometimes I want to reach out to the guy who I'm 99.9% sure has cyber stalked and harassed me for years and be, like, Hi, Brett Hanson! I know who you are! How are your two adult daughters who are both OLDER THAN ME doing? Do you think I should reach out to them and let them know what their deadbeat divorced dad does in his spare time?
Lots of things that are more private, but one thing that’s more generalizable is that I regret finishing my PhD a year early. I did so because I could and because I got bad/outdated advice that it would help my job market prospects, but the exact opposite ended up being the case. As it turns out, the field strongly values bright/shiny/new candidates who are still in graduate school and haven’t proven themselves yet. It allows the search committee to project their hopes onto a relatively blank slate, so long as the pedigree is sufficiently fancy.
Anyway, I think I almost certainly would’ve landed a tenure track job earlier if I’d stayed on a sixth year (especially since my ABD year was the worst year on record due to COVID!), but it ended up working out really well in the end. So who knows. It would’ve been nice to not have suffered through six years on the job market, though. I definitely reduced my life expectancy as a result of that choice, hence the regret.
I've been thinking about why shows (or really any art form) of inconsistent quality can "hit" even harder than art that is genuinely and consistently good.
tldr: Inconsistency creates a fracturing of the relationship between the artist and the consumer of the art, and this experience is uniquely isolating in a way that (sometimes) amplifies the emotional effects one would've already had in response to said art.
Some personal context before I begin: because of the substantial gap between s2 and s3, this was the first and only season I experienced with the background knowledge that my brother (whom I love with all my heart) is an addict in active recovery. He was technically already in active addiction during s2's release, but we didn't know about it yet. Given this, the whole thing hit a hell of a lot harder.
I may still get around to writing out more of my thoughts on this at some point long after anyone cares, but the thing that strikes me right now is a particular observation: I think the ending of this season was more gut-wrenching precisely because Sam Levinson produced such an inconsistent and imperfect piece of art.
There have always been flashes of greatness in the show, for all its faults. I also don't think it's fair to say Euphoria is "just another Skims/Degrassi/etc.", since at its best it's really a character study of addiction of a sort that really doesn't map on to the others as neatly as many people suppose. When the storyline is about that arc, it can be great. It can also be preachy and eye-roll-inducing, yes, But also, at times, great.
I think Rue's death scene (with the "7 minute" dream sequence, the cut to her labored breathing after the reveal, etc.) was exceptional. Everything after her death felt disrespectful and jarring, even though it was fun to see Ali do all that. Knowing that Levinson had that death sequence in him made the rest of s3 all the more painful, because I think I'll always be mourning a version of the show that Could Have Been, had Levinson had actual editors holding his feet to the fire.
More to say on this at a later time, perhaps, but what I'm struck with right now is how isolating an inconsistent piece of art is for the viewer. I feel like we all are forced to retreat into our own little headcanons of what we believe to really be true/what we think could have been, which makes it harder to communicate and find catharsis with others while we try to process the end of these characters we'd grown attached to over seven years.
When art is done truly, consistently well, it holds and cradles you in a way. You feel safe in the hands of its creator. You may disagree with others or with the author on matters of interpretation, but you don't need to contend with the fear that it's ultimately hollow. That it's ultimately nothing.
Levinson did not put us down gently in that way, thanks to his own egomania and refusal to work with a writing team. As a result, it feels like it is my responsibility to grieve Rue in a way that perhaps even Sam was not capable of doing, and I suspect others feel the same. It feels surreal, embarrassing even, to be grieving a show that could be as bad as Euphoria sometimes was. But that's precisely my point, I guess.
It’s actually a common misconception that philosophy as an academic discipline is concerned with quotes or pithy/interesting sayings that seem wise. Not your fault at all, though! It’s a common question philosophers get asked by well-intentioned people we run into, at which point we have to either change the subject or risk coming off as pedantic assholes like I just did (sorry! 😭).
The real kicker, though, is when people ask “Oh, you’re a philosopher? What’s your philosophy?” That question is on par with asking a physicist what their physics is 😭😭 (not saying you did that, to be clear!! just adding more context).
Philosophy is a discipline concerned with ruminating on eternal questions.
Every philosopher should have a philosophy, or else they arent doing philosophy, but instead something else under the name of philosophy, which then has an undermining nature to it, a contempt even, for the discipline itself.
…. Do you know you’re mansplaining academic philosophy to a professional academic philosopher right now?
The fact that you think “having a philosophy” (given what people typically mean by that) is necessary or at all relevant for engaging in philosophical inquiry shows that you don’t know anything about the field or the profession lol. What people tend to mean by that is better suited for a Hallmark card than anything to do with philosophy as a discipline. I have philosophical opinions, arguments, theories, etc., which I develop in my publications. None of that is the kind of thing that fits into a cheesy 1-2 sentence bon mot, which is what laypeople tend to have in mind when they ask that.
It’s actually a common misconception that philosophy as an academic discipline is concerned with quotes or pithy/interesting sayings that seem wise. Not your fault at all, though! It’s a common question philosophers get asked by well-intentioned people we run into, at which point we have to either change the subject or risk coming off as pedantic assholes like I just did (sorry! 😭).
The real kicker, though, is when people ask “Oh, you’re a philosopher? What’s your philosophy?” That question is on par with asking a physicist what their physics is 😭😭 (not saying you did that, to be clear!! just adding more context).
I don't even bother hardly to orrect my typos anymore. It is just affirmation that these words were typed by the hands of human being and not extruded by a fucnking AI
one of my professors was like (paraphrasing) "AI makes you sound the same as everybody else. The idea of a single "correct" English is racist and flattens the diversity of people. I don't care about grammar outside of the writing being understandable. I want to hear YOUR voice, Your dialect the unique way you communicate."
I have been more appreciative of the rough edges of human communication since chatGPT came to be. The misspellings and turns of phrase that real people produce.
The inherently flawed nature of an alive thing vs. the empty perfection of something that never had life in it at all
Reblogging because I tell my students exactly the same thing. Good to see other instructors are making that same point.
(At least I hope that’s the case, because the terrifying alternative is that there’s an overlap between “people i follow on tumblr” and “students i’ve taught”.)
izzy806
gummygunk
baratheonpilled
dailybridgerton
titsay
vaporwave
theartofmadeline
areudirty
