At Grinnell

I'm here in Grinnell!!! I started on what will be 3 days of interviewing.

My interview started with a wonderful dinner with some of the faculty members in the department and the Special Assistant to the President on Diversity Affairs. They gave me the lowdown on what's been happening and how timely and important my talk will be for them. But more importantly, I had forgotten what it was like to have colleagues. The people who I have met thus far are simply amazing and I know that's going to be a very common theme with everyone else so I hope I can show them my best. It's been really positive. I have to get ready for tomorrow because it's going to be a very full day from morning till night. I have a serious schedule meeting faculty from the Sociology and American Studies departments as well as various administrators. On top of all that, I have a lecture demonstration and my full talk in the afternoon and somewhere in-between I have to find time to eat. It's going to be one long intense day.

Holy Shit!

I got the call from Grinnell College and I made it to the next phase of the interview!!!

I'm off to Iowa next week!!!

Another Revision Done

About an hour ago, I finished my third revision of chapter 2 titled "Governmentalizing Risk: The Discursive Construction of Sexual Orientation in the Hate Crime Statistics Act of 1990."

That's right.

Yeah.

R.I.P.

I was able to finally catch the latest episode of my favorite police crime drama, The Wire, this evening. And I am utterly speechless at the death of Omar Little. He didn't go out in a blaze of gunfire by the police or Marlo's guns. He didn't overdose on drugs because that was not Omar's style. Many a time an attempt on his life was made by the toughest gangsters and he escaped them all. Until he was taken down by a corner kid no older than 12 years old while buying a pack of cigarettes at the store.

The Baltimore Sun didn't report his death. His story was pushed aside for a building fire. His body was even mistagged only to be corrected by the coroner, thus ending the episode and the man whose cheerful whistle sparked terror in the neighborhood where he walked the streets.

A vengeance unsettled.

R.I.P. Omar Little.

Here for HBO's discussion thread.

Professor Andrea Smith

I know of Professor Andrea Smith's work on indigenous rights, Native American studies, and being the co-founder of Incite! Women of Color Against Violence. I didn't know she was a faculty member in a joint appointment between American Cultures and Women's Studies at University Michigan. And I didn't know she was denied tenure. But get this! It was the Women's Studies Department that voted against her!

It'll be very very difficult to find out the exact reasons for her denial but it is proceeding up the university rank and file. Going up for tenure can be a heart-wrenching process where your research, teaching, and service are evaluated within the university and with experts in the field. It's a process that is mired with twists and turns and what may look like a positive file full of glowing reviews can unexpectedly turn into a denial. Sometimes you get a reason; sometimes you don't. And right now, there's no reason for the denial. I also know from several colleagues that even though tenure review is a heavily regulated process, it can also get quite personal and vindictive. Think about it: a junior faculty depends upon positive votes from the department. If you say something that irritates a senior faculty member -- and the reasons for can be extensive that includes clothing style (too brazen, too dowdy), personality (too aggressive, too aloof), shoes (yes it's a true story), and to every mundane element of one's personhood that has nothing to do with their professional standards.

It's too simple to say that you'll always encounter a jerk in your workplace. But these jerks made it through and they're in a position of power to decide your professional fate. Of course, the departmental vote is just one stop in a pretty extensive process from the university wide vote to the provost to the president. They are all represented in this process. Ideally, they can operate as the internal "check and balance" to correct gross mistakes like the one I just mentioned. But the problem is that they become vulnerable if they do override decisions from below. It would be seen as undermining the authority of the faculty and the university committee reviewing the case. So in the end, rarely, but not never, do the provost or the president use this authority.

It's really disappointing because I know (personally for one thing) many faculty who were denied tenure. Some legitimate such as a lack of publications. And others for some seriously ridiculous reasons, if they ever become public. For Professor Andrea Smith, her scholarship and service is simply outstanding. And to have the departmental vote split between two historically close departments is puzzling. Being denied tenure is like being punched in the gut. It's basically saying, "After six years of quality research, excellent teaching record, and service to the community and to the world, it all doesn't mean a damn thing to this university. So long and goodbye."

No one needs to feel like that. Certainly not Professor Smith's already distinguished career.


From The Chronicle of Higher Education:

Protests Heat Up at Michigan Over Tenure Case of Expert in Native American Studies

Students and faculty members at the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor have started an e-mail campaign to protest negative decisions in the tenure bid of Andrea L. Smith, who is interim director of the campus’s program in Native American studies.

Ms. Smith is an assistant professor with a joint appointment in Michigan’s American-culture program and women’s-studies department. The two programs split on her tenure bid, with American culture voting yes and women’s studies voting no. Then, last week, a panel in the College of Literature, Science, and the Arts sided with women’s studies and voted to reject Ms. Smith’s bid. The decision now goes to the provost, Teresa A. Sullivan.

The e-mail in support of Ms. Smith asks people to send letters to the provost protesting the negative decisions. The message says Ms. Smith is “one of the greatest indigenous feminist intellectuals of our time.” The message does not name the students and professors who are supporting Ms. Smith, nor does it detail why her tenure bid was turned down. The message is circulating on several academic e-mail lists, including one for women’s studies, and has been echoed in the blogosphere at places like ThinkGirl.net and La Chola.

Valerie Traub, who leads women’s studies at Michigan, declined to talk about Ms. Smith’s bid or the department’s decision. “It’s a process internal to the University of Michigan,” she said.

Ms. Smith could not be reached for comment. She is the author of Conquest: Sexual Violence and the American Indian Genocide (South End Press, 2005) and Native Americans and the Christian Right: The Gendered Politics of Unlikely Alliances, which is being released next month by Duke University Press. She is also a co-founder of Incite! Women of Color Against Violence, which calls itself a “national activist organization of radical feminists of color advancing a movement to end violence against women of color.” —Robin Wilson

Breathing a Sigh of Relief

It took a few days after my interview on Monday but I am relieved that it's over. The massive time in preparation from Thursday to Monday was exhausting but I felt it paid off. My answers were on the mark and I got a really positive sense of the committee. It just took me a few days to recover and actually get back to finishing my dissertation.

The minutes before the interview was a different story. I was obsessed with details, rehearsing my answers, and monitoring my tone. I was a nervous wreck right up to the last second. But when the interview started, my answers flowed, we were laughing, and just having a really positive conversation. They asked about my teaching, my thoughts about diversity, what a class would look like, and what I would teach for a senior seminar. I then asked about their department, working with the students, and life in Iowa. At the end, I felt really confident and that I put my best foot forward.

Now the long drawn out part. The committee told me that this is the first of two rounds, the phone interview being the first. I think I'm one of ten people at this stage. The second round is the campus visit that will take place two weeks later and I'm assuming it'll be with two to four finalists. So until then, it's the waiting game for me with hopefully some good news for me.

Great News

I received an email from Grinnell College and the search committee wants to have a 20" phone interview with me this Monday. Hooray!

*takes deep breath*

OK now the hard part. I've been on the 8-10 hour interviews where you meet the search committee, other faculty members, administrators and deans, students, and then you give your talk followed by a lengthy Q&A session, followed by another short meeting with remaining faculty, and then dinner (somehow you forget to eat breakfast or lunch so having snack bars was quite handy) with more faculty or the same faculty. At any rate, by the end of the day you're just dead tired and extremely hungry.

But a phone interview? For about 20 minutes? I've never done that before. I know I have to be selective in what I say but in a phone interview I can't see their reactions, body language, or anything. I can't tell if something is not making sense or is making a solid impression. It's strictly an auditory experience. So I've got to read up on phone interview techniques, the kinds of questions asked, and the best answers to give in response. On the plus side, I can prepare answers in advance and lucky for me, my partner has given and been in phone interviews so I have an advantage. It's just a lot of work and even though I'm a bit unnerved at the thought of interviews, I am relieved that I at least got one especially from a pretty strong institution like Grinnell.

OMG A Defense Date!!!!

My Ph.D. just took another step closer to reality as my dissertation chair and the committee confirmed that I am ready to defend. An initial survey from my committee indicates that we may be shooting for the last week in April. I have to email my chair to confirm a date with her, but it looks as though all the pieces of the puzzle are finally falling together. I'm still a chapter behind schedule, but I should be able to shoot that out within two weeks. It's going to be a mad rush.

§

I picked up an article by Prof. Vivien A. Schmidt, Boston University, entitled, "Institutionalism and the State" (2005). It's a review of The State: Theories and Issues edited by Colin Hay, David Marsh, and Michael Lister. For some reason their names are familiar but I can't put my finger on it at the moment. I have to check my bibliography at home for a reference. Anyways, the book is representative of a resurgence of state theories and the latest one is called "new institutionalism" which is an attempt to "bring the state back into" mainstream political science. "New institutionalism" is critical of the dominant agent-centered and behaviouralist approaches" to theories of the state and state power, and attempts to recontextualize politics from the dominance of "input-oriented theories of politics" to " the capacity of the institutions of the state." I'm checking it out because it sounds at first glance something that my dissertation falls properly under where the development of hate crimes legislation is not merely a social issue response or the mobilization of identity politics, but must be analyzed from the perspective of the state and its capacities to regulate issues and problems of identity and difference.

The APA Vote

I'm getting rather annoyed at the way in which Asian American voters have been "MIA" in the news especially when they've always been crucial especially in big states like California. It doesn't help when the hot topic these days is the "black-brown" debate about why the Latino voting block overwhelmingly supported Clinton's campaign than Obama's. Is it because Latinos are "more racist" to blacks? That is just as stupid as saying men who vote against Hillary are misogynist.

Look, the simple fact is this. Hillary is courting and benefiting from very well-established political connections with the Latino electorate from San Antonio to Los Angeles. Of course, Bill had a lot to do with it, but it's clear that Hillary is working the connections, strengthening her network, winning the Latino leadership, getting their votes, and paying her dues. She did the same thing with the Asian American electorate as well. She's also made it a point to reflect diversity in her campaign staff (1-year old by the way. I also think it's funny that Rudy's campaign staff is all white, and McCain had no Asians). Hillary has the highest number of Latinos and Asians in key positions on her staff. All of which translated into a California victory. As a matter of fact, CNN reported that Asians and Latinos carried Hillary outpacing the white-black vote who were in support of Obama. Go figure that out.

A colleague out in Los Angeles notes plainly that Hillary sent her money and ran a strong bilingual ad campaign. Obama did not. Obama made the same mistake that current LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa did when he first made a run some years ago. Villaraigosa "assumed" Latinos would vote for him, therefore he didn't run a strong ad campaign which did not translate into sending money to local tv/radio/newsprint media which did not translate into ... *drum roll please* ... VOTES! Obama may have strong Latino support, but they are not the historical leadership that are located in California, New Mexico, Arizona, and Texas in the agricultural industry which I'm hearing he's been slow on the ball with Texas. Check out the analysis by my old friend and colleague Jeff Chang about the different political strategies that enabled Clinton's victory of California and the Asian American-Latino voting block.

It just occurred to me that Obama's "message" of "Yes We Can!" is the English translation of "Si Se Puede!" which I think -- and I have to check this to be sure -- is the old 1960's rallying cry for the United Farm Workers, the labor union founded by Cesar Chavez and Philip Vera Cruz. Did Obama just appropriate that phrase? *ponders*

Anyways, I digress. My original post was to talk about the APA absence in media coverage and our role in the presidential elections. So the moment CNN does cover APA electoral power, we get this nonsense. Bad accents and bad journalism all at once. WTF?!?

Happy Valentine's Day

My favorite quotations from French theorist Roland Barthes ...

“To try to write love is to confront the muck of language: that region of hysteria where language is both too much and too little, excessive and impoverished.”
-- "Inexpressible Love," A Lover's Discourse (1977, trans. 1979)

“To hide a passion totally (or even to hide, more simply, its excess) is inconceivable: not because the human subject is too weak, but because passion is in essence made to be seen: the hiding must be seen: I want you to know that I am hiding something from you, that is the active paradox I must resolve: at one and the same time it must be known and not known: I want you to know that I don't want to show my feelings: that is the message I address to the other.”
-- "Dark Glasses," sect. 2, A Lover's Discourse (1977, trans. 1979)

"What the public wants is the image of passion, not passion itself."
-- Mythologies, "Le monde où l'on catche," (1957)

“Language is a skin: I rub my language against the other. It is as if I had words instead of fingers, or fingers at the tip of my words. My language trembles with desire.”
-- "Talking," A Lover's Discourse (1977, trans. 1978)

And of course Barry makes everything all right. =D

Sunset or Sunrise?

I finished my third revision to my chapter one and sent it off to my committee last Friday. It's a major overhaul of my general argument and I feel pretty good about this version. I hope my committee feels the same. I'll post my argument later but it is a reworking of hate violence studies through Foucault's governmentality/biopolitical lens.

I sent an email to my committee chair informing her about the incoming chapter, my changes, and my schedule. I asked for clarification about a defense date as well. I got her answer back within a day giving me the greenlight to set up a defense date this semester. She went through the details on what I needed and so forth.

Holy shit.

The end is coming.

The "Hawaii Chair"

By way of my friend and colleague from UCLA who's from Hawai'i.

I've got three words.

"OH MY GOD."

Frozen Grand Central

This is a "performance" piece by ImprovEverywhere where 200 people coordinated with each other to "freeze" at a specified time at Grand Central Station in New York City. Pretty cool stuff.

'Till Next Year

Why is it that Boston teams seem to choke at the very end?

*sighs*

Brady never got into his rhythm. Giants D-line maintained constant pressure. The Pats defense was never a threat to Manning. I wondered about Bill Belichick's decision to go for broke on 4th down instead of a field goal attempt.

Bah, whatever. It was a messy game all around, but hats off to the New York Giants for pulling it off.

I guess that's it for football. I wonder what I'll do on Sundays now?

"Word Association"

A SNL classic with Richard Pryor and Chevy Chase. Written by the preeminent comedian Paul Mooney, it's about a job interview and a word association test that really gets out of hand.

Chapter 1 Revision ...

... is done. Well at least the major overhaul. I have some grammatical stuff to take care of, but I think it lays out my general argument well enough. I have to have my partner's thumbs up before I send it to my committee. But at least I met my first goal. Now onto chapter 2 ...

By the way, I've been searching for a decent photoblog than the one I currently have, and I think I've found it in Aminus3. It's a fairly easy photo hosting and management site, very supportive community, lots of great photos, and it's FREE! I'll be discontinuing the current photoblog and replacing it when I get a chance. In the meantime, enjoy my photography at: http://disoriented.aminus3.com/.

Still At 75

The first day of the semester went without a hitch. It is after all the first day so there's no real work to be done other than take care of some administrative items. About 12 students initially didn't show up, but it was quickly filled up with 6 and about 4 more came in late. Two emailed me later to say they were having trouble scheduling around their work, but they will attend. So I think I'm back at 75.

It seems to be a good group of students. Lots of freshmen and a good number of seniors and juniors. I also have a few more military students, and for the first time, a student who was in the Air Force. Now to see if folks from the Air Force are really that smart. =D I also have a dozen students who are older and work full-time. They always add a really great dynamic to classroom discussions. I have one ex-pat from California, a former police officer now working at a policy thinktank in Alexandria and a surfer which totally rocks! Most of the students are local with one coming from Alaska. Mostly white, two or three Asians, a few Latinos and Arabs, I think two African Americans, and it's gender balanced.

During what could be called introductions, I had a student ask me how the women were in California. That caught me off guard, but the best answer I could come up with was "Intelligent." *shrugs* When I continued my discussion about the dangers of mob rule and democracy, the same guy brought up the example of ... the "Japs" ... and the internment camps during World War II. I know he's well-meaning and I don't think it's done out of malice. I was caught off guard again, but it was so absurd that I just had to laugh. Besides, it's just too damn early in the semester to be pissy about anything.

So ends my first day.

3.5 Hours to Go

... before I begin the spring semester with my class. I'm very annoyed at this moment. I have 75 students registered and about 10 more on the waiting list. I can reasonably expect another half-dozen or so who will wander in looking for a spot.

75 students and I'm still getting the same paycheck of a little less than $2500 for the semester. At a pretty good junior college some years ago, I taught a section with over 100 students and I got an extra thousand added to my base which came close to $4000 for that one class.

This is bullshit. And this gives me another reason not to care about this school.

A Page From NFL History

... or "Why I will never root for the New York Giants."

I thought I elaborate on my response to Rich's comment as a post. He originally said:

"What a game on Sunday, huh? Who would have thought, GIANTS and PATS in the Super Bowl?.....oh yeah, me and Rich.

I know you meant to say that you were rooting for the G-Men, so I'll forgive you on that one, but don't let it happen again!"

There is no doubt that this year's Superbowl will be historic as the Pats come within reach of the elusive "perfect season," one that was only accomplished by the Miami Dolphins in 1972. But that day is historic for another reason. Rich, you forget I'm still a die hard 49er fan, and let me remind you what this means ...

In the 1990-91 season, the 49ers were poised again for a Superbowl run, making it their third straight appearance. The "three-peat" was in the air. But in the NFC Championship, our glory was stolen by the scene stealing NY Giants. It was mainly a defensive game with the 49ers scoring the only touchdown when Hall of Famer Joe Montana connected with John Taylor. But "your team" of Neanderthals brutally knocked Joe Montana out of the game, and a relatively untested Steve Young took the reins as quarterback. We were minutes away from securing our place in NFL history to return to the Superbowl for a third straight time only to have "your team" pull a fake field goal for a first down. The Giants barbarians then cheated their way to a victory with Matt Bahr's 42-yard field goal ending the game with a score of 15-13.

The game also marked the departures of Ronnie Lott, Roger Craig, Eric Wright, Keena Turner, John Taylor, and sadly Joe Montana, among many others, in the following seasons. These stalwart warriors constituted the empire of the victorious 49ers of the 1980s.

I cursed at Bill Parcells. I raised my fists and swore a blood oath on that day. The NY Giants will suffer the indignity and humiliation of utter defeat. That day will come on February 3rd as the New England Patriots will decimate the New York Giants.

At last! I shall have my vengeance!!!

Yes, I Had to Go ...

... I went to the National Portrait Gallery yesterday, and paid tribute to Stephen Colbert's portrait, hanging on the second floor in front of the restroom, above two drinking fountains. Of course, I checked out all the other exhibits including some new installations in the contemporary art gallery, but really, it was Comedy Central's mock pundit that appealed to me the most. Imagine that, a political science/cultural studies professor going to see an entertainer's likeness in triple at a national arts institution in Washington, DC.

You got to love it.

I had to ask the people at the information desk on where it was, and to be honest, I was somewhat embarrassed. But an elderly man glanced up at me, and in what I could only describe as a face of exasperation, took a deep breath and bellowed, "Oh yes! The Stephen Colbert portrait. Everyone wants to see that ... He's more important than Abraham Lincoln ..."


"Oh shit," I thought to myself. He's had a pretty long day. I smiled, politely thanked him, and walked briskly across the museum's courtyard. He was not rude, but it was clear that he was tired. And I don't blame him because there were dozens and dozens of teenagers. I was getting somewhat irritated with their unintelligible prattle, and their rapid-fire texting. I don't remember that many kids the last time I was there, but I'm thinking it had something to do with Stephen Colbert. And sure enough, the kids were lined up, on the second floor from the entryway to the bathroom, about 20-30 bodies, all the way past a massive portrait of President Andrew Jackson. I stood in line, and witnessed a horrifying spectacle of kids being kids.

"Fuck me," I thought. And I wasn't the only one either because an elderly woman also muttered under her breath, "Oh my god." I turned around nodding in approval, and she spoke to me, "This is the value of intelligence in our country." At that moment, I didn't feel embarrassed anymore. I became indignant and righteous all of a sudden. I think it's because I've watched Stephen Colbert and I know how politically insightful he is as a comedian, entertainer, and a critic. I also know that his social, cultural, and political influence is enormous from Wikipedia to the National Portrait Gallery, and I think it's been really positive.

But I just don't know about these kids, at least, the ones I saw at the Gallery. They were little fucking monsters, like cockroaches scattering at camera flashes, and scurrying about the entrance to the bathroom. Like vermin coming out to play.