Posts by Creon Upton
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Ali wrote
Even where the contribution of arts/humanities to a healthy society is taken as a given, the assumption is that no social investment is required because these activities will continue anyway. The old and tired artists do it because they love it economics of matyrdom are being used, where society benefits by default from artistic acts of selfless service. A monastic/ vocational calling doesn't need education and research. dont be silly.
That's absolutely right, and it applies to academics as well: already people with considerable skills and knowledge accept fairly average incomes for the sake of research and teaching -- but the current environment in our universities is increasingly making the sacrifices too great, especially when the pay-off -- freedom of enquiry -- seems to be regarded by the institution as some anachronistic joke.
Simon wrote
I thought that one of the ideas behind university study is to open students' eyes to possibilities; to offer choices and options; to widen knowledge and understanding of the world.
And of course that does continue to go on, but it's being incrementally eroded.
Eg, as Geoff wrote
our understandings of contemporary life are pretty much framed by America--whether we embrace American values and world vierws, adapt or reject them.One instance--the intense interests we have in the Democrat primary!
I also recalled how American Studies introduced me to the notions of historiography and critical analysis--ideas I had never before encountered in NZ education.
The Change Proposal revealed a fundamental lack of understanding of American Studies or interdisciplinary critical studies in general, romanticising some supposed historical "core" of privileged disciplines. Ridiculous.
Bob, re the Employment Relations Act, I'm not sure, but I think some of this has been avoided by the disestablishment of entire programmes -- people are not made redundant as such: their jobs simply no longer exist. I think. But I can't imagine that management is getting bad legal advice. (In fact, I'd love to know how much all this is actually costing the university.)
And, finally, the latest news is that the release of a draft implementation plan has been delayed until April 15 while the powers that be consider the recommendations from the review panel.
PS Did anyone in Dunedin go see the show? Kyle? Ali?
-
Yes, Simon, I guess the funding thing is one of the problems: whatever the govt of the day decides is the appropriate measure dictates a lot of the policy.
At the moment I think PBRF (staff research output) and "completion and retention" (of students) are the important things.
But thankfully I'm only general staff, so I don't have to deal with these things directly.
Your point, though, is a good one: ironically, Film and Drama is one of the few areas in the Humanities that do actually lead in specific vocational directions.
But, generally speaking, most BA graduates do not go on to jobs in their immediate area of study. (Yes, Mum, I got that job as a Civil War historian -- it comes with health benefits and a very attractive pay scale.) So to introduce that "marketability" idea, which the Change Proposal did -- somehow implying that employers want graduates from "core" disciplines like Philosophy and Classics more than from AMST or TAFS -- is about as absurd as my previous clause suggests it to be.
The idea, I thought, from a BA is that it encourages critical thinking and communication on contemporary topics in contemporary ways.
And that it's good to have a population with those skills -- who are probably going to be able to do most jobs reasonably well as a result.
-
While the university's not paying me (lunch break) to do other things, I can begin to respond.
Bob wrote
Every business has to cut it's cloth according to changing circumstances and retrenchment and reorganisation is common in the commercial world. What is also common are support systems to mitigate for those affected.
In terms of the second point, of course there are some support systems put in place for staff during times of "change", but frankly the general attitude from management has been, I'm sure, completely at odds with recommended business practice -- essentially bullying and a complete lack of transparency, ie, a total failure to reassure staff of their value in the process.
But this, I think, relates to what I have to say about your first point. This is difficult because it creates the risk of accusations of elitism or whatever. But the difficulty with the business model is that it simply doesn't work in terms of what we understand universities to be: it is the specialist academic community that defines what they do and why. Taking academic policy out of the hands of the academics concerned is a massive (and I think wroing) change in direction.
Which might explain the heavy-handedness of the approach: drastic measures call for drastic means I suppose.
The hitch being that academics simply cannot do what they believe their job to be when that job is not supported by the management systems of the university.
The thing is, if as a society we really want to make such changes and redefine universities in this way, well, I guess that's how things go. But do we really want that? And if no, we need people from outside the institution to do some bleating about it too.
So it's nice to see a bit of bleating going on here. Cheers.
Back to work....
-
Just as well I only complained about the spelling and punctuation in those election pamphlets, I guess.
Yes, I was a little annoyed that I couldn't cite you criticising their choice of idiom as well, hoping to enjoy something like the sick little thrill I get whenever I hear an Enoch Brown complaining about others' pron__ou__nciation. Sorry, David: I have a disease.
Less trivially, I agree with the criticisms of Campbell. I suspect that it would be a lot better if the broadcast media simply ignored these scumbags, and that taking the fight to them looks suspiciously like precisely what they want -- as well as like exploitative sensationalism, which is really just as grotesque as the people themselves.
But, yes, if they have to acknowledge the issue they should treat it with a dignity that is calm, informed, and informative, and that shows up and alienates the Browns of this world -- because they are a sickness that must be treated; they are not simply wrong-headed and in need of a telling off.
Good on David and Keith, though, to talk good sense in a forum where concensus might otherwise lead to complacency: we should be thinking about why this stuff is out there, and why it's not just illiberal, but is also so utterly wrong.
-
surely the Afghan biscuit is an Australian invention
Didn't they throw all their afghans into the ocean or something?
-
They can only be saved by the internet's most loyal citizens, the pickers of nits.
So I say that Asia comprises some fifty countries and is not comprised of them, although I'm sure David's OED states that his wordy and confused rendering is acceptable.
an afghani is the unit of currency in Afghanistan
Well, with the people-trafficking that we all know is rampant in that part of the world, maybe Afghans -- better currency these days than afghanis -- have rightly inherited the term.
No wonder the redoubtable Enoch Brown wants to keep such sordid types out. Not to mention the way they confuse and corrupt our healthy and pure antipodean culture:
when we refer to 'afghans' in New Zealand we are talking about a delicious crunchy biscuit.
The "kiwi identity", after all, is in a precarious state: our icons must be protected from potential attack by the politically-correct-gone-mad who, concerned at racially-motivated cannibalistic intimations, may lobby to ban the biscuit.
Speaking of which, have you heard Murray Deaker is advertising this new lesbian porno flick? It's called Clitoral Erectness Gone Mad.
-
Wonderful stuff David. I'm sending your story to my niece immediately.
Yeah, publishers and parents are a tremendous hurdle when it comes to kids getting to read what they really want. And no child is in the least concerned with chronological absurdity: a gorilla eating pavlova is fine, but we can't have school on boxing day.
I particularly liked the cop removing his shoes and socks.
But enough with the wise cracks about English Departments already. Please, indulge us: we so want to be seen to matter.
-
I don't think I'll be picking up any antique sex toys on E-Bay.
In Big Time Tom Waits tells a story about a shop selling "used erotica". You can imagine his tone as he says something along the lines of: "Now, certain questions come to mind here...."
-
You mean like the prostrate problems I keep hearing about?
Well, you can't be literally buggered if you're supine.
-
"Literally buggered" was how a bloke described himself to me once.
Maybe the entire nation's suffering from old timer's disease.