ramble through the bronx

Monday, December 25, 2006

Merry Christmas!

Wish there was snow. But joy to all of you.

jane 12:16 PM [+]

Strangely Torn

Duke beat Gonzaga last night. I'm happy, yet sad. While I'm happy that my little Blue Devils were victorious, why did they have to play the Bulldogs? It's like being forced to choose between chocolate and caramel.

meg 8:19 AM [+]

Presence!

What I didn't get Jane for her birthday....

meg 3:36 PM [+]

Thanks for the birthday wishes!

And thanks to Ryan for this colourful message. What am I doing on this fine morning of my birthday? Finishing up grading!

One of my favourite students (a real sweetie) has already come by to pick up his paper -- he hasn't even had breakfast yet, just got out of bed. Awwww. That's way too early to be thinking about philosophy.

jane 10:22 AM [+]

In your honour

To celebrate Jane's birthday tomorrow, here are some other, less famous, people who she is kind enough to share her birthday with:

Christina Aguilera, Katie Holmes, Brad Pitt, Stone Cold Steve Austin, Betty
Grable, Steven Spielberg, Leonard Maltin

meg 4:31 PM [+]

On being considered "retarded"

Another YouTube video! This is almost ten minutes long -- but well worth watching. I was googling retardation today because of an obnoxious thread on LiveJournal about whether it's OK to use "retarded" as an insult meaning stupid. Grr. I don't think it's excessive PC-ness, but just simple courtesy and respect for humanity, not to use disabilities as insults.

But it's all very well and good for me to talk about this... but better to hear directly what it's like. The video's creator writes:

I made this video after seeing a number of things: Other disabled people rushing to prove that they were not some thing called "retarded," being referred to here as a "mong" and other such words myself (on and off YouTube) as well as seeing lots of pointless ridicule directed at people with developmental disabilities, and being asked questions about what it's like to be considered "retarded" in casual contacts with people, or to "look retarded", whatever that means. I explore these questions, and the prejudice and dehumanization that surrounds cognitive disability of all sorts, in my video. (Yes, this is a serious video, not poking fun at people.) Apologies for the splicing, the construction noises in the background, etc, that's to do with the equipment I have to work with here at the moment. This video is captioned.

Watch it.


Here's another: "On Being an Unperson"


Excerpt: "Being an unperson means that your life is not a real life. ... It means that your existence seems to fill people with disgust and fear. People see you and describe you as a hollow shell, a body without a soul, a changeling child, or a vegetable. Or they romanticize your life, calling you a special angel on earth. Whatever they call you, people refuse to see that you exist at all. [...] It means that if you do something real, important, and meaningful to you, people will think it's cute. They have a special laugh reserved for that. [...] Being an unperson means being hated. Not always in an overt emotional way. It means people want you to be a real person. Which sounds good, until you realize they don't believe you are a person already."

jane 6:41 PM [+]

I heart the Justice League

So, I've been watching the animated Justice League Unlimited Series with my friends Ryan and Drew. And it just fills me with joy -- it's so well done, and while it's not in continuity with the comics, the characterization is great. Anyway, I currently HEART Huntress (a Catholic! yes!) and Question ('cause who doesn't heart a conspiracy buff?). And obviously Green Arrow and Black Canary are teh awesome. So the episode, "Double Date," is the best EVER. I post it below:
















I think that's all of it. I hope this embedded video works; I haven't tried using it before.

And, of course, if you like Black Canary and Huntress, you totally need to read Birds of Prey.

jane 11:15 PM [+]

Thanks, Yale University Press!

This is totally the course book I will use if I get to teach philosophy & comics. I'd probably spend 2/3 of the course on superhero comics (including parodies, like the superhero appearances in Johnny the Homicidal Maniac* and commentary, like Watchmen), and the remainder on indie stuff -- which this Yale collection, that I was looking through today before church, supplies aplenty. Very yummy. Plus, a cover by Seth. heart!!


* Memorable quotation: "Help! my brain is being crushed by the weight of my enormous breasts!" Or something like that. I can't find the quotation right now, argh argh. Maybe it's in Squee, instead. I heart Jhonen Vasquez. Who will be at this February's New York ComicCon! And yes I already have my ticket. Why do you ask?

jane 10:58 PM [+]

Important news

Apparently Indian men really do need to drive muscle cars.

meg 1:29 PM [+]

A paper invite is always better

Okay, let me first say that anything that encourages people to RSVP is a positive force in society. Not enough people are polite enough to RSVP these days, and it drives me UP THE WALL. Without the simple act of saying yes or no, how will I ever know how many chicken skewers to make? I am not, however, all too fond of Evite. I'd rather get a real, snail mail invitation, a phone call or an e-mail, so that people won't know the guest list before responding... they just have to trust that I will invite good people. But, this is absurd. Only in the Times...

meg 4:26 PM [+]

This day in History

Today in 963, Leo 8 gets elected Pope.
Today in 1917, the Halifax Explosion occurred
Today in 1969, a man is killed at the Rolling Stones concert at Altamont Speedway, ending the free-living and loving era of the flowerchild
Today in 1989, the Ecole Polytechinque Massacre in Montreal happened

Man... I'm going home.

meg 8:20 AM [+]

Happy National Meth Day!

Quick on the heels of "Crack Cocaine Day" and "Mary Jane Day" comes a new US national holiday.... Meth Day!

May you all go out and celebrate in paranoia.

meg 1:57 PM [+]

Somehow, I'm not surprised

A nifty questionnaire that plots your political leanings. What a surprise.... I'm a lefty libertarian. Like Ghandi and Nelson Mandela.
My results:
Economic Left/Right: -7.13
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.36

meg 7:49 PM [+]

Sure, outsiders mistake me for a Canadian...

What American accent do you have? Your Result: North Central "North Central" is what professional linguists call the Minnesota accent. If you saw "Fargo" you probably didn't think the characters sounded very out of the ordinary. Outsiders probably mistake you for a Canadian a lot.
The West
The Midland
Boston
The Inland North
The South
Philadelphia
The Northeast
What American accent do you have? Take More Quizzes

jane 11:09 PM [+]

Map of you!

Just thought you'd like to see yourselves. Check it out!

jane 3:24 PM [+]

This whole professionalization thing is wacky

I've been getting some letters and emails lately, acknowledging receipt of my job applications.

One today, from a University That Will Remain Unnamed --

This is to acknowledge receipt of your application for the tenure-track position in Philosophy at Blahdiblah State University. Applications will be reviewed by the search committee during the next several weeks. We will be in touch with you as the selection proceeds.

In the meantime, in accordance with University policy, please complete and return the enclosed self-stamped and self-addressed affirmative action card to: Affirmative Action Office, 123 Superduper Building, Blahdiblah State, Random Town, US.

Thank you for your interest in the position.

Yours cordially,

Chair, Philosophy Search Committee

All very nice. Kind of weird to think that I'd be filling out an affirmative action card, since I think as a foreigner I don't get counted in the same categories. Oh well.

The silly thing is, they didn't actually enclose the card. Trust me. I triple-checked.

"Yikes!" I thought. "Now I have to email the search committee and tell them they screwed up. Yikes yikes yikes yikes." A (probably totally groundless and unreasonable) fear washed over me. I felt as though it was my fault the card wasn't there.

Is this nervousness and anxiety reason to think that I'm not ready for this application process? I wonder.

Anyway. I sent them a super-polite email ("Thank you for your letter acknowledging receipt of my application for the tenure-track philosophy position. I will be happy to complete and return the affirmative action card, but it was not enclosed in the envelope. Would you be so kind as to send me one?") and the chair just sent me one back, calling me by my first name and signing off with his first name, saying of course they apologize and will sent me one shortly. So it's all good.

This is just a sample view of the weird self-doubts I've had lately.

jane 7:40 PM [+]

The purpose of human life is to be happy, to flourish.

Dear friends, bear with me as I work through some of this stuff. This is going to include some basic philosophy, which I know is boring to many of you, but will lead to some specific comments about Catholic teachings on gay marriage, which I know you enjoy picking on.

Natural law theory is the dominant philosophical position within Catholic social thought. The Catechism of the Catholic Church, 2nd ed. presupposes it as the way to understand moral theory in general.

Basically, it works like this -- divine law (which is eternal) can either be natural or revealed. Revealed law is pretty much what you'd expect -- it's given to us by relevation, through the scriptures. The content and nature of revealed law are therefore open to scriptural interpretation, historical criticism, and other forms of careful reading -- there's a huge issue there of how this is to be done, of course, and Catholics and Protestants will have very different stances on this. Further, there's the issue of the Old Testament Law (mostly in the Ten Commandments) and the New Testament Law (the "New Covenant", the "new commandment" of Jesus, to love one another as God loves us). I am not trained in theology or scriptural studies and so won't begin to go into those issues. But basically, revealed law, by its nature, is speaking to those within a particular faith tradition. You have to already have faith in God before you can hear revealed law as speaking to you. You obviously can't cite Scripture as a normative moral authority to those who do not already accept it as such.

Natural law, on the other hand, is way trickier. Natural law theory states, basically that there is such a thing as the "natural law." The natural law is called the natural law because it presumes that there is such a thing as human nature, and that by virtue of being human, there is a certain way of proceeding that will be good for us.

The Catechism cites Aquinas: "The natural law is nothing other than the light of understanding placed in us by God; through it we know what we must do and what we must avoid. God has given this light or law at the creation." (Aquinas, Dec. praec. I; Cathechism #1955).

The Catechism goes on, at #1956: "The natural law, present in the heart of each man and established by reason, is universal in its precepts and its authority extends to all men. It expresses the dignity of the person and determines the basis for his fundamental rights and duties." (Interestingly, in support of this claim, the Catechism cites the non-Christian Cicero. The idea of the 'natural law' is thus not necessarily just part of Christian philosophy -- it just got picked up as A Good Idea by folks like Aquinas).

The idea of the natural law, therefore, is intended to account for why there seems to be so much commonality in certain moral practices. Whenever you are asked why you think something is "just plain wrong" or "clearly right," and you say "Because it just makes sense, that's what my heart tells me", natural law theorists would say that you're appealing to the light of understanding given to all human beings. That all human beings have access, sometimes dulled, sometimes clearer, to a basic sense of right & wrong.

This is because all human beings have essentially the same goal in life: to flourish in mind, body and spirit. Aristotle said that the purpose of human life was eudaimonia, which literally means something like 'good-spirited-ness', and is usually translated as "happiness"; my favourite translation in the literature (I forget for now who came up with it; maybe John Cooper?) is "human flourishing."

Picture a plant which is flourishing in the way appropriate to a plant. It is strong, its leaves are a vivid green, it reaches for the sun. Now picture a plant starved of nitrogen, or starved of water, or obliged to put up with my very-warm apartment. Note how it limps, flops around, fails to flourish.

Aristotle's idea is that humans are kinda similar. Obviously we're different from plants. We can move around, we can dance and sing, we're fundamentally social and political, we have culture, history, art, and we can reason. That said, the basic idea of flourishing is the same. Just as there's a way for a plant to flourish as a plant, there's a way for a human to flourish as a human -- for all of its potential abilities to be developed and actualized. Aristotle's idea of the goal of human life is for us to develop ourselves as much as possible.

Now, along the way, he notes that certain activities can be done well, or badly. For instance, we can let our anger run away with us, and that ultimately hurts us, if we become unable to hear the other side, or we become rash. Or, we might not have enough anger, and that hurts us too if we become cowards. There is a happy medium in between: rightful anger, which can still hear the other side, but not get pushed over. Aristotle proposes as a general rule that a virtuous form of activity is to be found in the middle of two extremes.

Aristotle's account of virtue and vice, therefore, is not intended to be an externally imposed account of moral good and evil, but intended to guide human beings toward the flourishing most appropriate to them. It's saying, "Look, human beings just are a certain way, and here's some advice to live life in a way that will help you flourish the most, and not get dragged down by stupid things."

Now, Aquinas picks up this account of human nature, human flourishing, and virtue & vice, but adds to it a specifically Christian understanding of the world & humans' place within it (well, he also adds a good dose of Platonism, but I won't get into that). So, humans are supposed to be happy -- but their happiness isn't just going to be the type of human flourishing that Aristotle describes. Because that is temporary, as even Aristotle recognizes -- the most well-adjusted & virtuous person can still come down with a horrible illness, or lose their family in an accident or a war, and it's really difficult to flourish in those circumstances. (Recall again that flourishing is for body AND soul -- neither Aristotle nor Aquinas see the soul as firmly separated from the body. We are ensouled bodies.)

Aquinas suggests that what Aristotle was describing was an imperfect happiness, because of its fragility & vulnerability to harm. It's the best happiness we can get when we're alive on earth, and we should still strive for it. However, ultimately, after death we can achieve perfect happiness in beholding God. Perfect, because no-one can take it away. Perfect, because (unlike the pleasures of earth, which the more we receive the more we want, and ultimately they never completely satisfy - we always want more) God totally satisfies -- God is infinite, after all! God gives us endless and unconditional love.

Now, if you read through a traditional discussion of virtue & vice, it starts sounding pretty stodgy and random. Why should some things be virtues and other seemingly harmless things be vices? (Aquinas has a great bit about how women & young men shouldn't drink alcohol, because they don't have the developed intellect to tell them not to get carried away by it & led into licentiousness. What-ever.)

But if you remember that the point of discussing virtue & vice is not (at least originally, or in its best form) to beat people over the head, but to give them practical guidelines as how to best be happy, then they're less offensive.

(If anyone's interested in the question of, "But aren't the particular views of human nature that would spawn particular conceptions of what IS virtuous/vice-errific utterly relative to the culture and society in which they are formed?", I can get to that. Because it's an interesting problem that I'm still trying to figure out -- so far my answer is "yes and no." But that is for another blog entry, I think. And I'll talk about Martha Nussbaum. And Hegel. And it will be fun. Maybe even Freud? and Foucault?)

OK! So, back to natural law theory. Natural law theory suggests that moral theory be based on an understanding of human beings as creatures able to flourish & be happy in particular ways, with particular things that would be HELPFUL to them and particular things that would be HARMFUL to them -- thus we should put together a moral theory that rules those HELPFUL things as morally "good" and those things that are HARMFUL as morally "wrong".

The classic objection to natural law theory is that it loads the dice -- that it has a predetermined sense of what is going to be "good" or "wrong," and reaches around for excuses in human nature to justify its presuppositions. So, for instance, a natural law theorist who is homophobic will reach around in human nature to find an excuse to call homosexuality "disordered" and hence "wrong", but the view of human nature itself was already clouded by the theorist's own homophobia.

Now, that history & culture can condition us into seeing falsehood instead of truth is obvious; consider, for instance, this excerpt from Pope John Paul II's 1995 Letter to Women:

Unfortunately, we are heirs to a history which has conditioned us to a remarkable extent. In every time and place, this conditioning has been an obstacle to the progress of women. Women's dignity has often been unacknowledged and their prerogatives misrepresented; they have often been relegated to the margins of society and even reduced to servitude. This has prevented women from truly being themselves and it has resulted in a spiritual impoverishment of humanity.

But here's the question I want to consider: Is this a reason for discarding the idea of "the natural law" altogether, or a call for trying to do it better, in the light of the many discoveries and realizations we have made about human beings?

I'm not sure of the answer.

Folks are trying to work this out, of course. James Alison, in his book On Being Liked, addressees Catholic teachings against homosexuality and asks why, given that we are beginning to understand that homosexuality is quite simply a fact (like, say, left-handedness -- which itself used to be associated with a disordered nature!), shouldn't our understanding of what will contribute to the flourishing of human beings (which is, after all, what God wants from us -- our flourishing and happiness in Her!) similarly be updated? (This thread comes up again & again in the essays in the book, but especially in "Being Wrong and Telling the Truth," which was originally given as a lecture at St. Joseph's in the Village Parish in NYC in May 2002). (I just finished this book, and have another one of his books - Faith Beyond Resentment on the way from Amazon -- great stuff!)

Similarly, Jean Porter, a professor of theology at Notre Dame, gave a lecture at Fordham last year entitled "Human Nature and the Purposes of Marriage." Note the plural in "purposes"! The paper was an argument that gay marriage was not contrary to the natural law, and it was rooted in 12th and 13th century scholars' ideas of examining social institutions, such as marriage, in terms of what purposes they serve (again, purposes intended to promote human flourishing). The paper did not conclude with an "anything-goes" approach to marriage -- but suggested that there were good reasons not to emphasize the procreative aspect over the unitive aspect. (I have an unpublished copy of the paper, in case any of you would like to have a look at it).

Now why did I post this very long post? I was looking back through Tokyo Tintin's blog and reread his entry on Pope Benedict's recent statements about gay marriage. The pope's ideas on gay marriage -- and modernity in general!! -- are of course kinda frustrating for me. Anyway, TT links to a Star article which I shall briefly quote:

While he did not specifically mention gay marriage, thousands of listeners at the fairgrounds in Verona's outskirts strongly applauded the two parts of his speech about the family and "other forms of unions".

He urged them to fight "with determination ... the risk of political and legislative decisions that contradict fundamental values and anthropological and ethical principles rooted in human nature".

The Pope said they had to defend "the family based on matrimony, opposing the introduction of laws on other forms of unions which would only destabilise it and obscure its special character and its social role, which has no substitute".

In another section of his speech, the Pope made another apparent reference to homosexual marriage, stating that the Church had to say "'no' to weak and deviant forms of love".

He said the Church wanted instead to say "'yes' to authentic love, to the reality of man as he was created by God".

Note the reference to "anthropological and ethical principles rooted in human nature." That's the natural law theory at work (and the fact that it's natural law he's talking about, and not just revealed law, is why he feels justified in saying that Catholics should resist this politically, and not just, say, avoid it for themselves. Natural law is, after all, supposed to be universal.)

But if God wants us to flourish, and plants within us an understanding of the natural law intended to help us to do so, then why does the repression of homosexuality lead to lies, closeting, and anguish, a lack of emotional & spiritual flourishing, while the acknowledgement of it as simply normal for many men and women leads to honesty and emotional maturity?

OK, I realize that the way I've posed this question loads it, and wouldn't convince anyone who didn't already agree. But I simply don't understand why, if God wants us to be happy and loved and love each other, the Pope's position is any more obvious? In a way that I can actually understand? In a way that doesn't utterly conflict with all of my experience?

It seems to me that to deny the beauty & human flourishing in the same-sex relationships I have witnessed would simply be lying to myself. And "lying is the most direct offense against the truth." (Catechism #2483).

Catholicism has, over the years, gone from promoting and endorsing the slave trade, to repudiating it. It has gone from openly stating that women are defective, to repudiating that. So I'm hopeful. And I'm hopeful that the development in Church teachings here could even be articulated according to the Church's own natural law way of doing things.

So, while I'm still not sure that I can fully endorse the idea of the natural law (I need to do more research; and I have a lot of concerns with its premises), I think that it need not be simply repressive. It can similarly be used as a tool for critique:

How best can the Church assure and promote the flourishing of all its members, gay and straight? What is the truth about human nature that we simply hadn't let ourselves discover until recently, that will permit us to tell the truth about how we love each other? Why can't our new understanding of human beings and their multifaceted love continue to contribute to our broader understanding of "authentic love"?

I'll close with some James Alison, from "Creation in Christ" (also in On Being Liked --

...one of the firmest consequences of the instistence on the natural law is the denial of the arbitrary or capricious nature of divine commandments. This is evident traditionally in the rejection of the voluntarist and nominalist positions with respect to morals. If God forbids us something it is because doing it does us no good. Which is to say, the holiness of the commandment is in the fact that it is for our good, and it is not the case that our good is to be found in following commandments independently of their consequences for us, just because they are commandments.

Well then, if this is valid, we can see that natural law is, in the first place, and before any of its possibly polemical use in the world of non-believers, a very powerful instrument of self-criticism with respect to our own moral teaching. If it is used correctly, the first consequence of the use of this instrument would be having confidence that we can change our own understanding of morality in the light of our growing appreciation of what is.

---

I also just want to add that not all Catholic teaching based on the natural law is as problematic -- it also leads to great stuff on the importance of a living wage and justice among nations.

I've gone on long enough though -- I had meant to clean my room today, and get some work done on my dissertation. Oh well. Time to make some more coffee.

jane 2:51 PM [+]

That's how he rolls

Oh my god... talk about giving a gender a bad name. Also, the coke bloat don't look too good on him. Just sayin'

Face recognition software

If this is what the FBI is using, I don't hold out much hope... But I do think it's cool to find out what celeb you look like. For once, I didn't get Caitlin from Degrassi.

meg 10:26 AM [+]

She's always right

Miss Manners says:

A Ph.D. is like a nose - you don't make a fuss about having one because you
assume that everyone does; it's only when you don't have one that it's
conspicuous.

meg 9:11 AM [+]

Giving Thanks

OK, so for the Canadians this is coming too late, and for the Americans this is in the midst of a whole opening-to-the-holiday-season GLUT of sentimentality, but bear with me, my friends.

I'm grateful to each and every one of you. My friends are the best part of my life.*

I'm having difficulty finishing this blog post because I'm chatting with two of you on Gmail. Ah, love. Oh, wait, three. Thanks for keeping me entertained whilst working at the library, eh!

Anyway, thanks.

I invite you all to share your own thanks in the comments.

--
* Oh, and God.

jane 3:49 PM [+]

Fun new toy!

I've been playing with StatCounter.

FUN! Especially fun is the map of the world displaying where viewers are coming from. Which means that I can say, with a fair amount of reliability, "Hi Sarah!", since I doubt anyone else looks at my blog from Switzerland.

Fun-o! I feel like a super-spy.

Of course, now I also feel obligated to write smarter things. (Megan, someone came in just to look at your morbid little New Jersey post! Feel honoured!)

All right. I should go back to work, eh?

jane 2:12 PM [+]

Horrible. Yet Funny

From North Jersey Media group:

BRADLEY BEACH -- A man was struck and killed early Tuesday by a New Jersey commuter train sent to pick up passengers stranded after their first train hit and killed someone else, authorities said.

meg 10:50 AM [+]

Oh yes, and there's that other side of comics

Sigh... just as I'm excited for getting some more Justice League comments in the mail, some serious food for thought from a former DC staffer --

Go here for The Video Store Girl's memoir of her involvement with the comic book industry (I've linked to the "November archive," so that all the posts will be there -- start at the bottom, though, and work your way back up).

Joanna at Comics Worth Reading diagnoses the problem thus:

The length of the quote is because I want it on the record, and the source has already wiped her blog once. Not surprisingly, she’s leaving comics. After her story, no one should ever ask why, or wonder why corporate American comics are so unfriendly to women, both live and in print.

You put a bunch of immature men, many of whom were very sick as children or had absent fathers or both, and all of whom escaped into over-muscled power fantasies as a result, in charge of a publishing subgroup with no prestige and little money. Several of them have never worked anywhere else, or if they have, it was at one of the few similar companies in the same industry that behave the same way. They’re still geeks, mentally, with low self-esteem and no success with women, few of whom they actually know in person, but they’re power brokers within their little world, and there are thousands like them who desperately want to be them… and you wonder why it all ends up so twisted?

I don't really have anything to say yet about this yet... I am reminded of some of the stuff in Linda Alcoff's collection, Singing in the Fire, about women in philosophy, though certainly the misogyny in contemporary philosophy is nowhere near as bad as what TVSG describes at DC. (The reminding probably has a lot more to do with me being in the midst of my own stuff, rather than me having yet fully grasped the real nastiness of what TVSG describes.) Curious as to your reactions.


Edit - see also Torontonian Christopher Butcher (from the Beguiling, on Queen)'s blog entry about TVSG's posts., and Rich Johnston from Comic Book Resources.

Edit #2 - see Gail Simone's comment a little ways down the Comic Book Resources thread about the post. Gail Simone, who writes comics for DC, including one of my new favourites, Birds of Prey, also commented in a supportive way on TVSG's blog.

jane 3:58 PM [+]

Philosophy in-joke, with comics

First, for those who know nothing of Harry Frankfurt's work (or, all they know is his best-selling essay, On Bullshit, wander over to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy's entry on Compatibilism and skip to 5.3.1, "Higher-Order Desires and the Nature of Persons." You can pick up on the Ekstrom you'd need to know from the entry on incompatibilist theories, and meandering down to 2.1, a couple paragraphs down.

Or, failing that, you'll probably get the joke from context anyway.

I had seen a post on a comics blog about superheroes and the myth of redemptive violence, which along the way of making some nice points about superheroes in comics, vs. folks in movies, treat & respond to violence, included the following:

A more interesting and ambiguous case is presented by Wolverine. Wolverine's attitude to violence is not depicted consistently, which is, I think, telling in itself; the shifts in his portrayals seem
indicative of the differing beliefs and feelings of his writers. The classic early Claremont Wolverine is a man afflicted with a bloodlust that he can barely manage to control. He wants to control it -- most of the time -- or perhaps it would be more accurate to say that he wants to want to control it, but he doesn't always want to control it. That is to say, he's a violence junkie, and while he knows his
habit is dangerous, though less for him than for the people around him, he still can't kick it. There are times when he wants to kick it -- to stop wanting to be violent -- but the underlying desire never disappears.

This description, of Wolverine wanting to want to control his violent desires, is a great example of having a second order desire. The first order desire would be to slash someone, & the second order desire would be to want not to want to slash someone.

I sent this to some friends, and the lovely Eleanor responded (and has given permission for me to post) with the following:

Does Harry Frankfurt ever make an appearance in the comic? I can
imagine the two of them having a good conversation:

Harry: You're having trouble forming an effective 2nd order desire not to slash people with the strips of metal attached to your hands.
Wolverine: It's true. But I've actually found Ekstrom and Velleman's
rationalist models to describe my behavior more precisely. I feel
what's most damaging about my impulse to violence is that it's
inconsistent with the self-image I'm trying to cultivate.
Harry: What self-image is that?
Wolverine: Thoughtful, sensitive, non-slashing type.
Harry: I see. With which image do you identify more?
Wolverine: I guess I wouldn't be "Wolverine" without the slashing.
Does that mean I should just choose to identify with my more violent
nature?
Harry: Um . . . I'll have to think about that. Why don't we finish
this conversation by email?

(Or something like that.) :)
E.

(That Eleanor wrote this without having seen all the panels of Wolverine meditating & angsting over his violent nature, is awesome.)

jane 12:15 PM [+]

Incommensurability?

Edited 1.20pm Saturday Nov 18...

Apologies for any incoherence or bad grammar-- there has been much wine. Plus, it is 4.00 am.

I was blessed to be engaged in two separate amazing conversations today. Well, no, three. The first was a text message exchange with a new friend, who shares my love of comics -- his blog is now listed at left. (Hi Ryan!) That was fun, even if he was texting during class (bad, bad, bad. But forgivable, since it amused me.)

After "Theories of Autonomy class," I went out for coffee with two folks from my program, one of whom is a died-in-the-wool atheist & ardent feminist, and the other raised pretty strongly Protestant, who's a little more conservative. The latter is a good friend of mine, and the former someone I like very much, though we're not yet close. We ended up having a great conversation about religion, the way it works, and the way it plays out in the public sphere. I felt like I kind of played a bridging role between the two, having been agnostic for so many years, yet also seeing the way in which recognizing my relationship to God starts changing my way of perceiving the world.

The main thing that became apparent during this conversation was that, though we were all three of us operating on very different principles and understandings, we were able to discourse together and move forward. We talked about religion vs. secularism, and how that opposition was ridiculous, because really, insofar as we all had hope for a better future, we were all somehow united.

Somehow, we still believe in this crazy species. Bizarre, eh?

The second conversation was with a Jesuit scholastic whom I'm slowly growing to like, through I'm still hesitant to call him a friend. With friends, I want to be totally open about my hopes & fears, and while I can be friends with people who don't share my political, social & religious beliefs, there still needs to be a basic comfort level there. And trust. And love (in a broad sense). Whereas with this person, I worry about us not ever really being able to see eye to eye.

Fittingly, we had an entire conversation was about how he & I pretty much had opposite upbringings -- him American, me Canadian; him homeschooled, me public schooled; him one of 8 children, me an only child; him Catholic, me raised agnostic/atheist; him not ever really knowing non-Catholics, me having Muslim, Hindu & Jewish girls in my Brownie & Girl Guide groups (I have a vague memory from Girl Guides of having to make sure that there were pork hot dogs for the Hindu brownies and beef hot dogs for the Muslim and Jewish brownies... I guess at the time veggie dogs were less popular?); he and his whole family are pro-life, me & my family - not so much. I was definitely raised firmly pro-choice.

Now, I know my Canadian friends are probably rolling your eyes at this description of my Jesuit acquaintance. But I will mention that he was also raised regularly visiting prisons, working with the poor, and is concerned that Jesuit missions in Latin America not be colonialist, but rather encourage the people to fight off poverty and oppression (he had criticisms of Protestant missions for being too pro-America, giving out TV's in exchange for acquiescing to Jesus). So don't write off his politics prima facie. It doesn't work quite that simply.

More to the point, we were able to have this conversation in a friendly and jovial way, and we were able to move past it onto other things. We do have a lot in common. And while a t-shirt he once wore rubbed me the wrong way (it had a slogan that made me very uncomfortable), he's a good guy.

So, here's the question. It's not just the US that's pretty divided by the so-called 'culture wars.' It's the whole world. The Anglican church might undergo schism over gay marriage, women bishops & gay bishops. Europe doesn't know how to integrate Muslim identities into its sense of itself beyond bare 'tolerance' -- it doesn't know if it can incorporate Muslim insights into a positively transformed Europe. No one knows how to integrate religion in general, whether Christian, Muslim, Jewish, whatever, into the public sphere (I'm not up, at the moment, on the current status of the BJP in India, but last I checked, there were issues there too).

Without giving up on fundamental commitments that we hold dear, no matter who we are (progressives don't get a 'pass' just 'cause we're progressive... that just doesn't hold up to scrutiny) -- how can we negotiate all this? Because on one level we're talking across incommensurable differences -- utter abysses of fundamental grounding principles.

But on the other level, we're all human, and we are able to love each other.

It's 4.16 am, and I'm a little inebriated, and I don't have any great insight here. I'm just saying that I've often been in situations that I've been conscious of conversations happening across seemingly unbridgeable divides. So -- guess what -- they're obviously not unbridgeable.

There's still fucking hope for us all.

Love you all.

jane 4:06 AM [+]

The world's literary bargain basement

Ahh, yes, the always amusing Get Fuzzy. (I identify with the cat)

meg 1:33 PM [+]

Fashion forward!

A brief history of a brilliant men's designer... You too can know the history of the Dorcus line!

meg 1:47 PM [+]

Super Weekend!

Jane was nice enough to let me come and visit this weekend. I had a superfun time. Thanks Jane!
Here's a cartoon to pay tribute to my flight.

meg 2:13 PM [+]

A brief emerald narrative, a.k.a., Dawn, you've created a monster




The fabled motto of the drug dealer is "first hit's free." Yes, that is how they suck you in to their vortex of doom.

I frequently visit the lovely Dawn in Ottawa, and while staying with her she gives me stacks of comics to read. Yay, comics. Thanks to her, I've read Chester Brown's I never liked you, Scott McLeod's Understanding Comics, and other classics -- but mostly, mostly, mostly I have read heaps of X-men.



It was so great to learn more about these characters, whom I had enjoyed in the movies, but who had so much more going on in the comics. Of course I loved Wolverine, but also Angel, Rogue (so much cooler in the comics than her shy movieverse self), Cannonball, Jamie Madrox (especially in Peter David's Madrox and X-Factor), etc., etc...

Thanks to Dawn, not only did I discover the soap-opera-fantasticosity of the Dark Phoenix saga, and the Morlock Massacre, and the Trial of Gambit, etc., but I also began to understand the difference between different writers and artists. I began to know my Chris Claremont from my Grant Morrison. Useful! Crucial!

Furthermore, Dawn pointed me toward the X-axis, a wonderfully snarky X-book review site. It was thoroughly entertaining and well-written, and I found myself diving into its archives to get a sense of the history of the X-books.



However, occasionally the reviewer would also review non-X-books. His review of All-star Superman 1 led me to figure that it would be worthwhile to check the series out. The series was already up to issue #5, but fortunately Midtown Comics had all five issues conveniently available in-store, so I just picked them all up.

I fell in love. The Grant Morrison & Frank Quitely team is the same as in the run of New X-men that I had read (again, thanks to Dawn), and really enjoyed, but the story was clean, economical, and Super-satisfying.

I wanted more. Who was this Superman, man of myth and legend, but whom I'd never really cared much about before? Furthermore, what was this DC, to be putting out such an excellent product?

Back in high school, thanks to another comic-book-pusher, Caitlyn, I had read a lot of DC's Vertigo line of comics. Everyone who knows me knows my love of Neil Gaiman's Sandman series, but I'd also read some Hellblazer and other Vertigo stuff. Mostly good, but it hadn't led me to explore the DC universe as a whole.

My exploration of the X-men had, on the other hand, led into a wholesale exploration of the Marvel universe. Possibly because of all the tie-ins and cross-overs and Events (it doesn't hurt that Dawn lent me House of M and this summer the Civil War event started). But in going around the internet and looking at what was out there, I found myself drawn to the types of elements discussed in this blogger's post about why she loves Marvel. If what Marvel was about was flawed heroes who are hated but fight back anyway, and DC was about iconic heroes revered by their society, well, then, hey -- that's a pretty obvious choice. Marvel for me!

Anyway. During all this, I read Alan Moore's The Watchmen, and mostly dug it, but realized that I couldn't totally get into its cynicism about its heroes. They were a little too flawed. I want to be a little more hopeful about my heroes.



Now, I forget how this all happened, exactly, but basically this is the next step in the story. Obviously, in poking around the internet, looking for information on superhero comics, and being the type of person I am, it didn't take me long to find Karen Healey's blog, Girls Read Comics (and They're Pissed) or, more to the point, Ragnell and Kalinara's When Fangirls Attack!.

Fun! Hours of procrastination! Feminist insights into comics and superheroes! Smart women talking about comics! YAY! Fun fun fun. (This, of course, was right around the time I started getting excited about possibly teaching a "Philosophical Themes in Comics" course.)

Now, both Ragnell and Kalinara are fans of a comic book character that, as I had been immersed in Marvel and beginning to dip my toe into DC via Superman, I had not yet really encountered: Green Lantern. (Note - at this early stage I wasn't even really aware that there were MULTIPLE Green Lanterns. Oh, the fun!) I began poking through the website Zamaron: A Green Lantern Femme-site and saw the enthusiasm they had for the Green Lantern Corps.

Hmmmm...

Around this time, my roommate had a party and a (cute) boy was wearing a Green Lantern T-shirt. We had a fun chat about comics in general, and I felt bad that I had no real idea about Green Lantern.



Shortly thereafter, I visited a friend in DC (the city, not the company) and stopped into Big Monkey Comics in Georgetown. The staff was really friendly, and I asked where a good place to begin reading Green Lantern would be. I had heard of the various Hal-vs-Kyle debates and didn't know where to wander in. They recommended Rebirth as a good new-reader-friendly start, and so I bought it, and read it on the train ride home.

LOVE! LOVE! LOVE!

Heroes that weren't perfect, but still trying! Heroes with decades of mythology behind them that I could get wrapped up in! Heroes with really adorable asses! (Which get a fair amount of attention, and deservedly so. Of course, also note Ragnell's warning post about crushes on Green Lanterns. This might be a problem, given that I've decided that Kyle Rayner is my new boyfriend. That said, since I'm not a comic book character, I doubt I'll end up dead because of it. See, by the way, Kalinara's blog post describing Kyle as "fangirl bait". Yup, sigh, yup. Oh well. Hey Dawn, she lists Gambit as also being "fangirl bait.")



I don't know. Something about the idealism of the Green Lantern Corps just sucked me in (and sucked in my wallet... I now own a pile of Green Lantern trade paperbacks and individual issues... and this all since October!).

I'm in love. Not just with Kyle Rayner. With the whole concept. And I can't stop wanting to share that love, much to the sadness of some of my friends around the office (fortunately, through careful Lending O' Comics, I am beginning to recruit my friend Rosa into Green Lantern Love. Excellent!)

Anyway, I just needed to share. Thanks for indulging me.

jane 1:23 PM [+]

And what I was waiting for all day just popped up on the NY Times site

Yes.

Breaking News 3:15 PM ET:
Allen Concedes in Virginia Senate Race; Democrats Win Full Control of Congress

No details yet on the site, but I don't need any. The headline is good enough for me. (the article below is still that he's expected to concede.)

jane 3:24 PM [+]

At last!!

To go with all the break-up news, at last there's hope for me and my true love. Hottie McHotsalot finally left Rosario Dawson.

On a more tragic note, my Mats is hurt! Perhaps he wants me to kiss it better?

Cartoon - very true.

meg 9:13 AM [+]

Modern marriage

Man, it seems like everyone's breaking up these days... Rummy and Dubya, and, more importantly, Britney and FedEx (love that name!!) MuchMusic broke the news in it's typically underwhelming fashion.

meg 4:24 PM [+]

Happy days are here again!

Thank you, Montana, and good bye, Mr. Rumsfeld, and we'll have to hold off on congratulating Virginia.

In any case, very good news all around.

I'll try to post something more profound later -- I have to prep for class -- but it is a VERY good day.

(plus, I received in the mail Green Lantern & Superman: Legend of the Green Flame, written by Neil Gaiman & illustrated by a bunch o' folks. very pleased. I should also post sometime soon about how I've fallen in love with Green Lantern, eh? And how Kyle Rayner, one of the Green Lanterns, is my new boyfriend? just 'cause he doesn't exist doesn't stop him from being dreamy)

jane 3:25 PM [+]

Not the most important thing happening today

Well, with the midterms, this sure ain't the most important thing happening (Jane, I fully expect a less frivolous post than this today), but in my unending devotion to YouTube, here's a funny ad.

Also, to ease your commuting...

meg 10:03 AM [+]

Side effects

Man, if the side effects are anything like these, I can't wait to use anti-aging cream.

meg 4:25 PM [+]

Friends with music

Right now, I'm listening to my friend David's CD. He's a singer-songwriter I met while stage managing a show he lit, and then we became friends. He also has a lovely wife, Irene, also a friend of mine. While listening to Another time of year (one of my favorites) it occurred to me that since he's on tour right now, and y'all are out there waiting for stuff to do, I should link to his site so that you can listen a bit, and maybe even check out his shows:

Nov. 25, 8pm Kenny's Castaways 157 Bleecker St NYC 10012
Dec. 2, 8pm Avant Garde Bar 135 1/2 Besserer St.Ottawa, ON CAN

Go see him!

meg 3:29 PM [+]

Two cute movies

Just watched two good movies tonight instead of working (isn't that the way it always is?)
For those who think Judi Dench is just the cutest thing that ever was, there's Mrs. Henderson Presents.
And for those, like me, who like ballet there was the documentary Ballets Russes.
Also, I went to see Apple last night. Recommended.

meg 11:53 PM [+]

Smut central

I'm sure all the true smut-rakers (not muck, this is much more salacious) know this woman already, but oh my god, Lainey knows all. ALL. And weeks before any of the tabloids do. But my deep burning question: how does she find out all this from Vancouver?? VANCOUVER!!!
a. it's 2053 km from Hollywood.
b. What is a nice Canadian girl doing spreading all this gossip?

meg 9:53 AM [+]

Why I am not going to go see Borat

I hate to be a killjoy, but....

I'm sure, as per the conclusion of the New York Times article, that Borat will be very funny, and very successful. All criticisms of it as being anti-Semitic can be pushed aside by saying, look, this is satire, or black comedy, and further, Sacha Baron Cohen is Jewish and we have a long and noble tradition of allowing people to poke fun at their own racial/ethnic/religious/national backgrounds. Sure.

My question is, why doesn't anyone take the Kazakhstani's complaints seriously?

From the afore-linked NY Times article:

Still, “I can almost guarantee you that not everyone will get the joke,” said Richard B. Jewell, a professor of film history at the University of Southern California. But he added: “In my opinion it’s a very healthy thing. Some of best films that have been made in the last 50 years have been black comedies.” He cited “Dr. Strangelove,” which poked fun at nuclear holocaust.

“What can be more serious?” he asked. “It makes people think about these things in ways they don’t when there are more straightforward, serious, sober films.”

Sure, let's do good black comedy and satire. YES. I wholeheartedly agree. But who's really being mocked in this movie? Jewish folk? Well, maybe, but see above re. mocking one's own. Who is being mocked here, and yet doesn't have a voice?



Kazakhstan. It's one of those random former Soviet republics that's still pretty vague to most of us in the West. It's a miscellanous country, one that you might name off the top of your head while making a joke about random countries (sort of like Albania was for Wag the Dog, before the ethnic Albanians in Kosovo became famous). To our Western pop culture ears, the place sounds a little silly. It's definitely Other to us.

Therefore, we can use it as the brunt of jokes.

Therefore, we can make random statements about Kazakhstani women, or Kazakhstani liquor, or what have you, and know that no one will correct us, or call us out, or anything, because really, doesn't Kazakhstan exist for us as some sort of mythical, joke-fodder place?

According to the CIA World Factbook, Kazakhstan is 47% Muslim and 44% Orthodox Christian. I'm sure these two groups love being the on-going butt of Sasha Baron Cohen's joke... and the ongoing butt of our jokes, as we repeat the funny Borat lines. Their resentment isn't anti-Semitic, or anti-West, it's simply them being quite simply sick of being made fun of, just for existing.

(Recall Triumph the Insult Dog and his visit to Quebec? It wasn't so much that it was wrong of him to poke fun at French Canadians, it's just that the way he was poking fun of them showed that he didn't actually know anything about them. Haha. So funny. That's why the in-joke is funny -- because it relies on being in the know. Just to say "hey, that thing that's strange to me... it's funny... just 'cause... and I'll just repeat it over and over again until YOU think it's funny too!" -- that's not black comedy, or satire. It's just lame.)



Again, from the CIA world factbook:

Native Kazakhs, a mix of Turkic and Mongol nomadic tribes who migrated into the region in the 13th century, were rarely united as a single nation. The area was conquered by Russia in the 18th century, and Kazakhstan became a Soviet Republic in 1936. During the 1950s and 1960s agricultural "Virgin Lands" program, Soviet citizens were encouraged to help cultivate Kazakhstan's northern pastures. This influx of immigrants (mostly Russians, but also some other deported nationalities) skewed the ethnic mixture and enabled non-Kazakhs to outnumber natives. Independence in 1991 caused many of these newcomers to emigrate. Current issues include: developing a cohesive national identity; expanding the development of the country's vast energy resources and exporting them to world markets; achieving a sustainable economic growth outside the oil, gas, and mining sectors; and strengthening relations with neighboring states and other foreign powers.

I just want to pull out a couple things -- First, this is a country for whom (sort of like Canada) developing a strong national identity (because of immigration of non-Kazakhs, because Kazakhs were never really united) is a key issue. I'm sure they love it that the first thing most young Westerners will think of when they think of Kazakhstan is Borat. Fantastic-o. (I mean, at least Canada had Dudley Do-Right back in the day. And at least Bob & Doug McKenzie knew something about Canada. Sasha Baron Cohen just seems to make shit up. See my bracket above, re. Triumph the Insult Dog). Secondly, this is a country trying to strengthen relations with neighboring states. In other words, a country trying to emerge on the world stage as something more than a Random Former Soviet Republic. Even though I'm sure diplomats can tell fact from fiction (well... reasonably sure...), Borat is basically an extended attack ad, undermining Kazakhstan's developing world brand identity. (how's that for a mixed metaphor?)

I just want to conclude by saying that I'm not the world's biggest fan of Kazakhstan. Here's the Amnesty International index for Kazakhstan. Freedom of expression seems to be a problem in Kazakhstan. So, obviously it would be lame for me, in this light, to say that Borat should be banned in the West, just 'cause those freedom-of-expression-hating-Kazakhs dislike it. Freedom of expression is great. And important. Yes. I just think there's better ways to convince Kazakhstan of the importance of freedom of expression than making a movie that mocks it as a bunch of anti-Semites, and better ways of convincing the world that we need to have a serious public conversation about our attitudes toward religion, ethnicity, and political correctness, than by making a movie that makes everyone just a little bit stupider.

PS - translation: I think the movie's racist. (Ethnicist?) no matter how funny it might be.

Thanks to the online Lonely Planet guide to Kazakhstan for the images.

jane 7:52 PM [+]

Month o' crazy almost done

Hey y'all... sorry not to have posted much lately. (Thanks, Megan, for holding the fort!) Three conferences down, and just one to go -- this Saturday's one-day conference in New Jersey. In addition to conferencing, I've been assembling my application for the Newcombe fellowship (about which I posted earlier) and assembling my dossier for a few academic jobs. No, not the Concordia one, but a few others that explicitly say things like "PhD near completion". I can do "near" completion. It's been pretty hectic, all in all. (that, plus a whole bunch of Graduate Student Association stuff, but I won't get into that) oh yeah, and teaching. Got midterm grades in and so forth, but already I have a new stack of journal entries on Descartes to read and grade.

I am not going to tell you where I'm appyling to jobs, since I doubt I'll even hear back from any of them. If I get any interviews, I'll let you know. The academic hiring process is pretty lengthy -- initial deadlines in November, hearing back from places in time for interviews at the Eastern APA meeting Dec 29-30, possibly campus interviews in March or April. whew!

ok, must go teach.

jane 5:56 PM [+]

Bond, James Bond

He's no Sean Connery, but how are we feeling about the new Bond?

meg 1:47 PM [+]

Online shopping

For when you get your degree and become a man

meg 3:05 PM [+]

I'm rich...
I'm rich....er than most of the people in the world. In fact, I'm the 350,496,782nd richest person in the world. Pretty impressive, no? Find out your rank.

meg 3:59 PM [+]

Cute little cartoon

Apparently, it's funnier if you know Flash, but I still think it's cute

meg 11:08 AM [+]

I pity the fool....

Check out the Mr. T playset.

meg 2:42 PM [+]

My life was not complete

Okay, it's still not complete, but now it's much cooler.

meg 2:01 PM [+]

Life-changing product

I've always been concerned with the increase in my crotch heat index from wearing cords. Well, if you have the same worries, check this out. Especially the post from Oct. 11, in the blog section.

meg 1:16 PM [+]

And in case you don't have your own karaoke machine... I'm sorry if it gets stuck in your head. What language is that??

meg 11:01 AM [+]

Why bother with the flight to London?

When you can visit the British Museum from the comfort of your own couch? Well, not the whole museum, just the Mughal India room.

meg 10:56 AM [+]

Both of him

I love my Mats. Hat trick, over-time, game-winnning 500th career goal. Does it get any better?

meg 7:53 PM [+]

I want one!
I think the world would be a better place if we all had these in our workplaces.

meg 10:35 AM [+]

Teaching to the test

As posted in the wonderfully snarky academics_anon community on livejournal, witness this op-ed piece on higher education, written by Bush's former deputy secretary of education.

Thrill to memorable lines, such as the following:

Institutions of higher education need to report an academic bottom line.

What on earth is an "academic bottom line", especially in higher education? How on earth would this be measured? I'm reminded of those graphs that the Nortel people used to show us in high school, about job rates for folks with computer science vs. humanities degrees. They showed the first five years after graduation, in which, yes, the comp sci people had better luck finding jobs. They left out the research on how the groups are doing 10-20 years later, which shows humanities folk as doing pretty well, thankyouverymuch.

While they’re at it, colleges and universities must make it a priority that their students graduate. While most tuition payers assume a baccalaureate degree takes four years to complete, the truth is it takes typically more than six years. In 2003, only 34 percent of graduating students had completed their degree in four years or less.

Is the four years a priority? Given the reduced amount of federal funding for student loans & grants in the US, doesn't it make sense that more folk might be going part-time, so they can work on the side? Or coming back to school with a family, which will also cause the baccalaureate to take longer? Why should 4 years be a priority?

The academy responds to the demands of disciplines and faculty. It is a culture that cherishes independence and freedom. And it is a culture seriously out of touch with much of America.

I'm not sure this one even needs a comment. ;)

Faculty members decide what they want to teach and when they want to teach, if, indeed, they teach at all.

Yes, since deans and chairs have no say over this at all. Riiiiight.

Faculty members typically spend fewer than 200 hours a year in the classroom. That amounts to just five 40-hour weeks.

As I sit in my office hours, preparing my lesson, and having students come in to ask me questions on their upcoming papers (sometimes they even ask me questions over Gmail chat, while I'm relaxing), I look at this statement and kind of go, "what?" Yes, faculty are all lazy. Of course.

Take a look at what passes for subjects of scholarly and instructional focus on campuses. Should taxpayer dollars really go to underwrite courses in such things as the history of comic book art?

As someone currently in the midst of putting together a syllabus on philosophical themes in comic books, I think, "yes," actually. (As someone in the academics_anon forum pointed out, "Is he aware that only one hundred years ago, spending your precious academic years studying NOVELS was considered, if not the height of frivolity, at least a very lightweight major?"

And there needs to be a greater emphasis on teaching students what they need to know, rather than what faculty want to talk about.

Again, since deans and chairs never worry about this as it is.

The various college rating systems and publications are entertaining and interesting to read, but they don’t provide the sort of objective data tuition payers need to make informed decisions.

Since students (I refuse to say parents. But that's a separate issue. I hate the infantilization of students here at Fordham, which apparently is a problem all over the place. But I digress)... students = consumers. Obviously.

For generations, a college education has been a big part of the American dream. Much of the world has come to America to get a higher education. But nothing guarantees that this will be the case in the future. Indeed, for more and more American citizens, that dream is coming into question.

And the fault lies on faculty teaching about comic book art, not affordability or anything ilke that. Obviously. Of course. Yee-haw.

jane 3:14 PM [+]

Make yourself seem cooler!

Have you ever felt that your phone doesn't ring enough? Well, why go to the effort of reaching out and making new friends when services such at this exist on the internet?

meg 1:20 PM [+]

Partay time

Wow. There are no words. Watch the video.

meg 3:28 PM [+]

Happy Thanksgiving

You just can't forget about Canadian Thanksgiving. This year, I'm thankful for Nine West shoes and my new AirPort. Also, the new Google toolbar. Love that. I'm also thankful for all my friends. Y'all rock.
However! I'm not thankful for the new Rachael Ray show. She needs to go away. Also, Tyra Banks. I'm not even going to torture you with links to them.

meg 5:17 PM [+]

Comics

To add to your selection of internet comics...

meg 11:42 AM [+]

Now THAT'S the kind of headline I like to see from the CBC

Leafs rebound to crush Senators.

6-0.

Nice.

---

In other words, wish me luck as I apply for the the Newcombe Fellowship from the Woodrow Wilson National Fellowship Foundation. It's good for $19,000 over 12 months and is pretty prestigious; apparently they have a good track record of having their fellows find jobs.

I'm totally not going to get it (they give out 30, across all disciplines, across the whole U.S.) but given its description, how could I not apply?

The Charlotte W. Newcombe Doctoral Dissertation Fellowships are designed to encourage original and significant study of ethical or religious values in all fields of the humanities and social sciences, and particularly to help Ph.D. candidates in these fields complete their dissertation work in a timely manner. In addition to topics in religious studies or in ethics (philosophical or religious), dissertations appropriate to the Newcombe Fellowship competition might explore the ethical implications of foreign policy, the values influencing political decisions, the moral codes of other cultures, and religious or ethical issues reflected in history or literature.

jane 10:21 AM [+]

Why I love Jennifer Cruisie

If you know me well (or at all, really) you will know my love of chick-lit. And my favorite writer out there is Jennifer Cruisie. Well, she just released a new book, and, if I may, I'd like to treat you to a paragraph:

"Captain J.T. Wilder stood as still as possible in deference to his screaming
hangover, looked around at what he'd figured was going to be a good deal and
though, clusterfuck"

-"Don't Look Down" by Jennifer Cruisie and Bob Mayer, now on bookshelves.

And this is why I love her.

meg 11:07 AM [+]

Jane, do you live near any of this?

meg 2:23 PM [+]

My dream come true
Sign me up!!!

In other news, Eva Longoria and Tony Parker have split up. Which makes me laugh, because she was pretty love-struck all through the relationship.

meg 10:09 AM [+]

Back from DC

(1) I got accepted to the small NJ conference, so that will officially make it 4 conferences 4 weekends in a row. Yee haw! They are:

Oct 12-14: Society for Phenomenology and Existential Philosophy (SPEP) in Philadelphia (my paper: on rights, a la Fichte and Hegel)
Oct 20-22: Ancient & Mediaeval Phil Conference in NY (the same one I used to help organize) (my paper: on Aristotle and Fichte on the state's role in educating its citizens toward virtue)
Oct 26-29: American Catholic Philosophical Association (ACPA) in Ohio (60 miles outside of Columbus OH) (my paper: Fichte and Husserl on how we get to truth through communication with others)
Nov. 4: New Jersey Regional Philosophical Association (paper on
feminist conceptions of relational autonomy.)

(2) Had a fantastic time in DC. It was really relaxing to be away, and I really liked what I saw of the city. Yay quiet subway! Of course, once I got back to NYC, folks round here who've lived in DC did their best to burst my bubble & remind me about all the bad elements of DC (like how the nice quiet subway with its nice padded seats doesn't actually serve the poorer portions of the city, and rather is aimed at making life easier for commuters from the suburbs) but I blocked my ears and sang "lalala" until they stopped. I was on vacation, dammit. I get to think about economic deprivation every other single day.

(3) How are y'all liking Megan's posts? where did all the comments go? Was I so quiet for a while that everybody left?

jane 4:32 PM [+]

Garfield said it best

I'm not too fond of Mondays. Sundays always end with a bang of Simpsons and Family Guy, which does not lead logically into the total drudgery of Mondays. But I think I'm doing better than this....

I think this guy needs a hug. Perhaps it would help his bitterness and anger. This person used to be angry, but now is over it. I am not angry, I'm just bored. Experiencing a little of the ennui, if you will.

meg 2:34 PM [+]

For all you hockey fans

In case you're ever in Detroit... or Florida...

meg 11:24 AM [+]

Daily link

Okay, to continue the trend... Also, just in case you can't get enough Fridays (which is my third favourite day of the week), apparently it's always Friday's here! Although, I've eaten there, and trust me, sometimes it's better when your Friday experience ends.

For weekend plans, Jane I wish you could come to Nuit Blanche, for which the link from my computer won't work. So you'll have to google it on your own.

meg 11:40 AM [+]

The link of the day

Well, since it's Thursday, I thought it would be appropriate. Also, its namesake.

meg 2:29 PM [+]

Call me Ishmael

Jane says I have to make my headings more emboldened. Anyway, we were discussing what I should call myself. Apparently, supadupa rockstar is "over the top" (my words, not hers). It would be prudent to call myself something recognizable so you know who I am. Not, for example, Robert. But on my quest for a name, I found this... That's right, call me Ishmael. With the entire text on the web, I'll never be bored at work again!!

meg 3:58 PM [+]

Hello all.
I'm sure most of y'all know me, but in case you hadn't heard... the rumours are true! Jane has invited me to become her guestblogger. Mostly because I have a somewhat mindless job that involves surfing the internet for several hours a day. All in all, I've come across some great links. Which I will now share with you. For instance...

A map of New York from the world's fair in 1939 or so. Note the LES is referred to as the ghetto. Plus ca change...

meg 3:40 PM [+]

Paul!

I heart you.

jane 12:51 AM [+]

Wham! Pow!

The other day I was at a department lecture and was kind of distracted -- it was a good talk, but it would have been better had the speaker prepared a handout with a flowchart or something to make the progress of her argument easier to follow. Anyway. I decided that, rather than simply doodling, I would put together a draft of what would be a dream course: "Philosophy and Comics." I sketched out a tentative reading list and some focus questions for the course.

A few days later I was talking with one of my committee members, telling him that I was not, after all, going to apply for the Concordia job. Then, to change the subject, I started telling him about this draft syllabus I'd put together, and how it would be a great course. He agreed that it was the type of course that would probably get a lot of student interest, and be a good vehicle for a lot of philosophical themes that might otherwise seem remote.

This is the email I got today (LC is our Lincoln Center campus; the School of Liberal Studies (FCLS) is our adult education school):

From: D---@fordham.edu
To: jane-------@gmail.com
Date: 17-Sep-2006 12:28:58 EDT
Subject: Re: Fwd: [FEAST] njrpa call for papers

Dear Jane,

Would you want to offer your Philosophical Themes in Comics course in the
evenings at LC? I'm sure that it would be very popular if offered. I see
that the college of liberal studies is requesting two electives in the
evenings, and I only have one to offer. I would have to ask [the Chair of the Philosophy Dept.] and the deans of FCLS about this, of course. But it is an idea. We'd have to move fast to create the course, since I have to give in this schedule
tomorrow, and finalize it by Tuesday.

John D------

(names altered so as to not risk googly attention)

Anyway, I have no idea if this will actually pan out, but it's still kind of cool to think about. I wrote him back and said that OF COURSE I would love to do it, if I could. I'll keep you all posted. I will also post the syllabus once I finish typing it up.

The moral of the story is: yes, you CAN turn your procrastination into valuable career stuff. Huzzah!

jane 2:26 PM [+]

I still exist, more or less

I've decided that I'm not really mentally ready to think about being finished with my dissertation in time for the Concordia job. I feel kind of overwhelmed in general. To be honest, all I really want to do is lie in bed all day. Getting out of bed to make some coffee seems about the limit of my ambition, and even that I put off doing until I get a coffee-withdrawal headache (usually after being awake 2 hours, still lying in bed.)

anyway, hence the no-blog-posting. I've almost finished one of my October conference papers. RCIA starts tonight.

None of my crushes are panning out.

Hope you are all well.

jane 3:13 PM [+]

How fast can I write my dissertation?

My friend Stephen forwarded me the following job posting:

21. CONCORDIA UNIVERSITY, Montreal, QUEBEC, Canada. Tenure-track position starting July 1, 2007, as assistant professor with AOS in Kant and Nineteenth Century German Philosophy. Send covering letter, resume, copies of recent publications, statement of teaching philosophy and interests, research achievements, evidence of teaching effectiveness, three letters of reference to: Chair, Department of Philosophy, Concordia University, 1455 de Maisonneuve Blvd W., Montreal QC Canada H3G1M8. Doctorate is expected by time of appointment. Review of applications begins November 1. All qualified applicants are encouraged to apply; however, Canadian citizens and permanent residents of Canada will be given priority. Concordia University is committed to employment equity. (SW06), posted: 07/07/06.

Concordia! With my Area of Specialty! argh argh argh.

Anyway, my advisor thinks I should go for it -- he writes

My recommendation is this: do everything you can to complete as much of your dissertation as possible between now and Nov. 1 -- and be able to promise that you'll have everything done by July 2007 (I can stand behind you on that). And go ahead and apply. When/if you impress them at the interview stage, they will be much more likely to cut you some slack about finishing on time, etc. So, in a word: work like crazy to complete as much of the dissertation as you can, and apply in time for their Nov. 2006 deadline (though it does not seem to be such a 'hard' deadline, after all.....)

And then in a follow-up email added

P.S. Many Canadian applicants for ths job will most likely have Canadian degrees. Your having a U.S. degree (which gives you U.S. contacts and U.S. experience) may give you an advantage over most Canadian applicants. The 'Jesuit' connection between Concordia (which emerged, in part, out of Loyola College) and Fordham cannot hurt, either.

Scary, scary, scary. I guess I'll go for it -- it's good practice for when I really go on the job market... but it's pretty terrifying as a prospect.

It would just be so GOOD.....

Meanwhile, here are some pictures --
This is me at the lectern at our Spring 2006 (April) symposium, co-hosted with the English department. Do I look sufficiently professional to be finishing a diss and going on the market? Would YOU hire me to teach your youngsters? I'm just the moderator at this event -- but would YOU take me seriously? I am really quite anxious about this. Even though I know I have nothing to lose, really... just some sleep. I will have to do my best to practice saying smart things. And also my best to avoid getting sucked in to things people want me to help out with... I will have to learn the magical word "No."


The second photo is more me, obviously, even though it's a guitar and not a banjo. This is taken at Heather's cottage, and it's Dawn's friend Charles's guitar.


Unfortunately the CD Dawn burned a bunch of photos onto dislikes my laptop, so I will wait to put more stuff up later once I am using a less-about-to-fall-apart computer.

In other news, I may be getting Jorge Cham from PhD comics to come speak at Fordham. Yay!!

jane 4:08 PM [+]

The title speaks for itself

From the Ottawa CBC news feed, Dealers lower crack prices to stave off competition.

jane 6:09 PM [+]

Yay poker!

Just want to share that I won last night at poker. Yes indeedy.

The game? Hold 'em, of course.

We (various grad students and their spouses) have been playing weekly for the last month or so. I was pretty new to the game, having only played a couple times before (once in Ottawa, with Dawn et al, and once in the spring with some Jesuits), so the last few game I thought to myself "I'm happy as long as I don't embarrass myself."

This particular game, I'd been thinking about strategy and how to win. And I thought to myself, "I'd like to win this time."

And I did. We played tournament-style, $5 buy-in, 8 players. So I won $35. Yay me!

Clearly I am the champion of the world.

jane 6:07 PM [+]

Iris Marion Young, dead at 57

She passed away on the 31st; here's today's Chicago Sun-Times obit:

U. of C. professor had passion for social justice

August 4, 2006

Iris Marion Young thought, wrote and taught about social justice.

But she also walked the front lines, marching out of academe to picket with striking workers at the Congress Hotel, or visiting employers to check out conditions for immigrant workers.

Her work in feminist and leftist political thought proved her to be "one of the most important political philosophers of the past quarter-century,'' said Cass Sunstein, U. of C. law and political science professor. Her writings have been translated into more than 20 languages.

Ms. Young, a political science professor at the University of Chicago, died Tuesday in her Hyde Park home of cancer. She was 57.

Ms. Young's 1990 book Justice and the Politics of Difference is a staple in classrooms around the world.

Cultural imperialism



In it, she took issue with "the tradition of thinking about justice in which what matters is whether people are getting a fair distribution of goods and resources,'' said a U. of C. colleague, Patchen Markell, associate professor in the Political Science Department.

Ms. Young argued "that there are other kinds of injustice in the world, besides just not getting a fair share of stuff,'' he said.

One other kind of injustice "involves a coerced cultural assimilation,'' Markell said. For example, "that there's a certain way of being an American that you have to live up to'' to get the full benefits of citizenship -- a kind of cultural imperialism.

Recently, her thinking evolved to questions of responsibility.

"How do you think about your responsibility -- as a consumer of Nike apparel -- ... for working conditions in Indonesia,'' for instance, Markell said. "We don't have ideas about responsibility to help us think about that.''

Ms. Young's most recent book was a collection of essays on the female body experience. A shorter version, Throwing Like a Girl, was published in the '80s.

It concerned the "distinctiveness of occupying a female body,'' Markell said.

Ms. Young grew up in the melting pot of Astoria, Queens, in New York.

"There are so many different types of people there and she grew up among them. I'm sure that shaped a lot of her views,'' said her daughter, Morgen Alexander-Young.

Ms. Young's mother was an interpreter for the United Nations who spoke more than a dozen languages, her daughter said, and her father died when she was young.

After graduating from Queens College in 1970, Ms. Young earned master's and doctorate degrees in philosophy from Pennsylvania State University.

There she met another grad student, David Alexander. They married 34 years ago.

As a grass-roots leftist political activist, Ms. Young didn't stop at writing about justice.

She joined Congress Hotel workers picketing in the ongoing strike that started in June 2003. It was remarkable for someone of her status to do such grunt work, said Jamie Daniel, former chair of Chicago Workers' Rights Board, which campaigns for workers' rights.

Ms. Young also visited employers to talk about mistreatment of workers, Daniel said.

As a political scientist, Ms. Young saw the workers' struggles as test cases for whether we are really a democracy, Daniel said.

Ms. Young marched in anti-war rallies and worked to persuade the World Bank to relieve African debt, said her daughter, who recalls her as a fully engaged mother on top of her other roles.

Avid appreciation for life



"I remember her balancing a career where she was growing in stature -- balancing that with being there for me every day after school, doing my homework with me, being there for my dad and cooking amazing meals,'' Alexander-Young said.

Ms. Young -- who loved jazz -- decided about 10 years ago she wanted to play for herself, her daughter said. So she started lessons. It was typical of her avid appreciation for life.

"She just loved the really small details, like how Lake Michigan looked at different times of the day, the different colors,'' her daughter said.

Besides her husband and daughter, survivors include a brother, James Young, and a sister, Jacqueline Young.

A fall memorial service is planned at the University of Chicago.

I really like Young's work... I actually have her Justice and the Politics of Difference on my office desk right now. This is very sad... but the description of her life here makes me want to emulate that example. Here's a tidbit from the U Chicago release:

Young was a popular teacher both of graduate and undergraduate students. Her class on global justice was among the most sought-after courses offered in Political Science.

“So many people wanted to take the course that it would be in a lecture hall, but she didn’t want to stand in the front of the room and spout information — she wanted students to be able to have a conversation,” said Markell, a professor in the department. “She was so popular that she was always outgrowing the format she most enjoyed teaching in. Everyone wanted to study with her.”

Young’s popularity was just as sure among her colleagues, who loved engaging in debate with her as much as they enjoyed watching her play jazz piano at the University’s faculty club, the Quadrangle Club.

“It never ceased to amaze me how someone of such immense scholarly stature and distinction could be so unfailingly generous with her students and so completely egalitarian with her colleagues,” said Sunstein.

Now there's an academic to look up to.

jane 3:03 PM [+]