Demographics:
How many applications have you sent out this year?:
0:
1-10:2
10-20: 1
21-30: 1
31-40:
41-50:
50+:199.33.165.36 21:09, November 16, 2012 (UTC)
How many MLA interviews (or skype/phone if they are leading to campus visits)?:
8+:
4+:
1+:
0 (with 15+ applications sent):
Are you a (an)...?
Assistant Professor: 2
Associate Professor:
Full Professor:
ABD (will finish this academic year): 3
ABD and currently in a one-year, VAP, visiting instructor, lecturer or adjunct position:
Ph.D. in hand (one-year, VAP, Lecturer, post-doc, adjunct): 2
Ph.D. in hand (unable to find academic employment at the moment):
Questionable Recent Hires at Elite Institutions:
Cheers to this comment (from below) which makes a great epigraph to this section: Anyway, what is the value of a system that can “qualify” people who haven’t experienced a culture, “top” experts in that culture…???
A "Caribbean" specialist at Princeton. Gringa y buena gente, eso sí, she grew up in Massachusetts, went to Yale and Duke. Really, Princeton? I mean, she probably went south on spring break a few times, maybe for a conference or two. (Maybe for a semester as an undergrad, too! Wow!) I am sure spending 12 years studying what is an “exotic” and faraway place and culture (exotic to her, that is) in New Haven and Durham was enough for her to be a finalist. Were any PhDs from Caribbean universities even interviewed...even at MLA? Que yo sepa, la respuesta es n-o. Resultado predecible en la “competición internacional" para el nuevo profe…
Response to above: Could we avoid the populist rage this year, please? Academia is unfair/fair in ways you don't understand. One can either embrace this or seek a new profession.
- Response to above: An aim of the wiki movement is to give agency to voices that the system silences. I mean, if there were transparency about this hire as the process was taking place, would the SC think twice--or at least interview someone from a U in the Caribbean? It’s too bad there aren’t dozens of these reports coming out… Indeed, why don't more people post such things here, would be a better question.
- One can either embrace this or seek a new profession. What a fascist thing to say. How’s the lock-step policy working in your job search? It seems change occurs in ways you don't understand.
- Response 3: if her research was good enough and she could teach the classes they needed (which I guess was the case), then why shouldn't they have hired her? Why should someone who got his or her PhD be interviewed just because she or he studied in the Caribbean? Remember: research results usually trump any other factors. And geographical positioning leads nowhere: some of the best works that I have read on peninsular literature were written by scholars who were born and grew up in Mexico. Their ideas is the only thing that I am interested in; I couldn't care less where they were from or where they got their PhD.
- Response 4: Based on the implicit logic of the original post why should any Department of Spanish/Hispanic Studies etc. hire any gring@s at all since being a native speaker means that one is a thoughtful (authentic. . ?) scholar and much better teacher. . . . .In addition, since "she probably went south on spring break a few times maybe for a conference" . . .she's might even be blonde and therefore can have nothing substantive to say on, well, just about anything. I mean, really people. Get it together. Perhaps they hired her because she was qualified?
- -------
Response to 3/4: They are not divine at Princeton (though it seems some posting here believe that they are) and on this wiki we should scrutinize who(m) they hire—and criticize the decisions when necessary. Being appointed top “expert” in Caribbean culture based on a study of it from air-conditioned buildings in Connecticut/NC makes little sense—great as anyone’s work is and “qualified” as they may be… Anyway, what is the value of a system that can “qualify” people who haven’t experienced a culture, “top” experts in that culture…??? The hire sounds a bit colonial to me, if what OP said is true. (Can a gringa be experta--al nivel de Princton--en temas caribeños? I'd say yes, as long as she has some first-hand experience in the subject; like a PhD from a university in that region, 5 years work experience there, something along those lines...) This hire seems to be based on the myth that applicants from the elite hallways know more than the local…same story as ever. That complaint is certainly a valid one from my seat. At any rate, her expertise at best appears to be via remate.
If the supposed top expert in my culture studied it from some other place, took some vacations and did some conferences, and published some great articles/books on it, and he or she got the job that I also applied for--and I’m on this website NOW, you can bet I’m going to roll my eyes. Even if the books were great.
It’s a question of whether or not cultural fields command local experience in that culture in order to be an expert. I don’t know this person or her work, but—even if her work is stellar, if Princeton didn’t interview people from Caribbean universities, I’ve got a beef with that. (x3)
Response ad absurdum: The original poster cannot possibly be so naive as to think that one must study in the Caribbean to understand the Caribbean. So, let's take a stab in the dark and assume that (s)he could not get into Yale or Duke and then was denied a job at Princeton and is masking his/her bruised ego in moral outrage.
Re: above. Bruised ego, not student at Yale/Duke, denied Pton job are all pretty much givens. Any comment on discussion? Can/should a "remate" candidate lacking experience in a culture be appointed an "expert" while locals to that culture aren't even interviewed? Bitterness aside, you don't see a problem with that? I think it's insightful commentary on elite SCs.
However, I imagine most people on this page are profs or aspiring profs from the US, PhDs in the US, like the Princeton hire, so while logic might not support that hire, the crowd would. (?)(x2)
--- Ugh. This kind of stuff makes me so depressed about the state of our field. Take a look at all the other disciplines' pages. Do you see nasty personal comments about specific people and unprofessional language? No. If you want to question Princeton's decision not to interview any candidates from the Caribbean, fine. Clearly Princeton is not exactly a bastion of egalitarianism, and the exclusion of anyone with a degree from a Caribbean university would indeed be very problematic (though the original poster does not have his or her facts straight, because the job posted that year was not specifically for a Caribbeanist - it was Latin Americanist (open), and the finalists did not all work on the Caribbean). But there is no need to denigrate the person they did hire, whose work (by the way) is very solid. (And I do not know her personally, so this is not just some defense from a friend.) In any case, it is not like the department at Princeton is full of gringos - in fact, she is the only Latin Americanist from the U.S. More often than not, being a gringo is a major disadvantage in getting a job in a Spanish department, precisely because of the attitude the original poster displays. For some people it doesn't matter if you speak perfect Spanish, have lived in Latin America, done extensive research in the region, and know your stuff backwards and forward - you are still not 'authentic.' My response to that: if you want the study of Latin America to be taken seriously within the university, treat it as an intellectual endeavor, not as some authentic essence to which you only have access if you are a native. According to the logic of the original poster, all of us gringos should just throw in the towel now because we will never 'get it' - but this also means that no Latin American should ever be allowed to weigh in on U.S. culture, because only those of us who were brought up in the U.S. can presume to speak about it. I would never make such a terrible argument. And sure, we need to recognize the messed up political relationship between the U.S. and Latin America - we live and work in a world where imperialism exists. But the answer to that isn't to limit Latin Americanist jobs to people who are supposedly the 'authentic' representatives of the region. That is just bad politics. And the answer certainly isn't to tear down individual people whose work actually offers a critical perspective of imperialism. (x3)
---I don't agree. I wish people would be more honest and use this forum to voice these concerns across the disciplines. And I don't agree much the reasoning here, either: Does a person have a right to voice how nonsensical he/she feels that a hire is? Why the hell not. If this is ever read by this new Princeton prof, he/she can get over it while collecting paychecks and social capital (not that anyone hired at Princeton has ever been short of social capital...):
For some people it doesn't matter if you speak perfect Spanish, have lived in Latin America, done extensive research in the region, and know your stuff backwards and forward - you are still not 'authentic.'
Part of the problem is that this hire hasn’t lived in Latin America.
treat it as an intellectual endeavor, not as some authentic essence to which you only have access if you are a native.
One needs “access” through being a native orthrough relevant experience in the culture. Candidates who have/are neither are generally not hired—this case is listed under the "Questionable Hires" as the person is non-native, has not lived in Latin America, and was hired at an elite institution as a specialist in Latin American topics.(x2) ---
An insider's response: As a current Duke graduate student, I feel the need to weigh in. At Duke, we are required to spend significant time in-situ before writing on a topic. Many of our graduate students spend as much time in Latin America and Spain as they do Durham. And they use the Duke network - professors, alumni, fellow graduate students - to tap into the local intellectual community and meet artists, writers, and politicians while there. I can only assume that the same goes for other "gringos at elite insitutions." If you ask me, the original poster's argument consists of a mixture of misinformation, essentialism, and sour grapes.
- To Above: Please elaborate on the foreign experience policies at Duke. This hire was at Dule It says here one must complete 14 courses in Durham (http://romancestudies.duke.edu/uploads/media_items/2013-14-brochure.original.pdf) before choosing a topic. Going abroad for more than 6 weeks doesn't sound very doable. When I considered applying, the schedules didn't allow much time for going abroad, except in the summer. I've actually heard that at many schools the opposite of above post is true: institutions structure programs to keep people on campus as much as possible. (As of course why study Spanish in the US in the first place? To be an "elite" insider during these ridiculous employment "competitions," I guess.)
Response whatever#: wow, where to start at? I better finish having my cup of coffee...ok, now I'm ready! Idea #1: the OP implies that this person is now a "top 'expert' in Caribbean culture" just because she's at Princeton: speak of adopting an elitist perspective! By being at Princeton, this person does not automatically become a "top expert"!!! In my field, for example, Princeton is an "ok" department (actually, I can only think of one "top expert" in my field who is currently teaching at an Ivy League institution). This person was appointed to teach certain classes and do research on topics that interest her, and while I am sure that she and her colleagues wish that she eventually becomes a "top expert" in her field, I think we need to wait about 20 years to see if that is true. Maybe the "top expert in Caribbean culture" will be someone at Rutgers, or at Ohio State University, or at Duke. Who knows? It will depend on the publications. Idea #2: by mere curiosity (this is not my field) I checked her research profile and I see that she is working on "the emergence of a post-romantic aesthetics of concretude in Brazil, Cuba, and Spain in the wake of changes in empire and capitalism in the 1890s". So pray tell: can somebody really claim that by being from/having studied at the Caribbean you are more "legitimated" to write about late nineteenth century literature? Really? Idea #3: what is the Caribbean (or any other geographical are you wish to mention)? For example, if you studied in the U. of Puerto Rico, do you have an intrinsic deeper knowledge of Cuban/República Dominican/Other Caribbean country culture? Methinks not. Idea #3: This goes both ways. I once heard a top top top top figure in my field claim in a conference that natives from region X where not capable of becoming experts in region X because of an "inherent lack of perspective". Other colleagues and I called his BS and clearly explained why that is such a preposterous idea. Idea #4: I have friends who studied at Duke and I can tell you that they spent plenty of time in whatever regions they need to go to (I can think of one friend who spent at least a couple of years in Europe between Summer trips and a year-long research stay there). So, please, stop generalizing. You are supposed to be a researcher and know better. IN SHORT: could we please stop waving the useless "native/geographical" argument around? It only points to a lack of understanding of what we do in academia, of how we do it, and how the academic hiring system works, and I personally consider its racist undertones unacceptable.
- Princeton isn’t elite? Yawn. Sadly, anyone hired at Princeton in any field is perceived (erroneous a label as it may be) as a de facto expert.
- “I personally consider its racist undertones unacceptable.” Interesting that old constructs like race are brought up by posters defending elites. The accepted norm is that anyone can be experts/hires in Latin American topics as long as they have relevant experience in that culture. The OP’s opinion is that, no, classrooms in NC and CT do not count as “relevant” experience.
- What is not addressed in the above poster’s diatribe is:
- 1) Can someone be an “expert” in a culture without experience in that culture?
- ---