/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.4864555]

>Reading "academic article"
>Lack of coherencey and succinctness
>Bad prose
>Obfuscation
>Takes 3 paragraphs to explain something that would only take 1 paragraph
>Obvious filler
>Creates his/her own "conceit" or "axiom" which they refer back to, this creating their own "dialectic" to understanding the literature under question
>Sentences that literally has the subtext of fuckin the dog
>More bad prose
>irrelevant nonsense in no way related to anything
>This is a professor
>He/she gets paid 100k+ for writing out this garbage
>If I ever wrote like them, my profs/TAs would slam my asshole to the ground and fuck my grades
>There is no justice in this world

I have an essay that could revolutionize literary discourse for the next 50 years or so, but I'll be drown out by the prickly intellectually vain charlatans of academia.

[Anonymous No.4864573]

>tfw you get a female academic in the humanities as your TA/professor
>tfw reading their facile fucking "I just needed to write something" critiques of your work, and then reading their work
>tfw reading their go-nowhere DISCURSIVE DIALECTIC OF GENDERING IN PRO-IMMIGRATION PROPAGANDA IN NEW BRUNSWICKIAN LOCAL NEWSPAPERS 1852-1853 horseshit that gets published in the American Historical Review
>tfw having to hear about Natalie Zemon fucking Davis, the biggest hack cunt in the universe

[Anonymous No.4864574]

>>4864555
>Sentences that literally has the subtext of fuckin the dog

Nice grammar. Guess who won't be taking your criticisms very seriously now?

[Anonymous No.4864576]

>>4864574
wanna be my /lit/ editor?

[Anonymous No.4864580]

>>4864555
I was with you until
>I have an essay that could revolutionize literary discourse for the next 50 years.

Do you really think you're that much smarter than everyone else, to the point where not only are you capable of writing such an essay, but also that everyone would still be too stupid to recognize how brilliant it is?

Do you have any idea how much of a cock that makes you? If yo truly believe your essay is that good, send it out to literary magazines. Send it out to twenty different ones each deadline, and keep sending it out.

If it truly is as good as you say, it will be noticed eventually. If it is never picked up, you just might have to come to the terms with the fact that you're not nearly as smart as you think you are

[Anonymous No.4864582]

>>4864555
>>This is a professor
>>He/she gets paid 100k+ for writing out this garbage

u wot

Unless this professor is at the toppest of top tier universities, he or she is not making that much.

[Anonymous No.4864585]

>>4864580
I don't think you understand, I'm a fuckin genius.

[Anonymous No.4864586]

>>4864582
Where I live, all professors are public figures and their salaries are published by the government on a website. Almost all of them make 100-150k.

[Anonymous No.4864590]

>>4864555
While I'm all on board calling out badly written academic articles, I'm not comfortable fully dissing academic writing because when it's good, it's great. And that includes some of the "obfuscatory" stuff.

[Anonymous No.4864596]

>>4864555
>I have an essay that could revolutionize literary discourse for the next 50 years or so, but I'll be drown out by the prickly intellectually vain charlatans of academia.

You are now aware that nearly every academic feels the same way, and since their revolutionary work either would be or has been drowned out by the prickly intellectually vain charlatans of academia they instead write out their 'academic articles'.

[Anonymous No.4864599]

>>4864586
Where at? I'm not questioning you statement, but I sure as hell would like to teach there.

[Anonymous No.4864605]

This reminds me...what is the point of academic journals? Surely it would be smarter to put out a magazine or start a website with original content rather than put all of that time and effort into an article very few people, if any, are ever going to read.

[Anonymous No.4864606]

>>4864576
Dude that bird/fish gif. I used to watch that short on VHS way back when. Shit that really brings me back.

[Anonymous No.4864626]

>>4864605
In some broad notional sense, publishing in a journal gives what you're saying authority and it disseminates your work to the people who are going to be making new discoveries and thinking the new thoughts and basically it will contribute to the advance of knowledge more by being in an academic journal because that's the purpose of academia.

In a less notional, more real, not total bullshit sense, academic journals improve your credentials within the closed-in world of academia and increase your standing and your ability to keep your position and get new positions. So the less prestigious the publication, or your blog or whatever, the less it benefits you in terms of moving up that treadmill. Cash money, man.

[Anonymous No.4864676]

>>4864626
Also: lit journals are used by publishing companies and universities to scout potential talent. Everybody wants to find that next big intellect or writer, and lit magazines make it a whole lot easier for them to do that.

[Anonymous No.4864683]

>>4864626
>>4864676
You two better shut up and quit talking like you know what you're talking about.

[onionring !Rrxa7zePwI No.4864699]

purpose of journal is peer review

[Anonymous No.4864711]

>>4864683
What exactly indicates that they don't know what they're talking about and what makes your word any better?

[Anonymous No.4864720]

>>4864699
how's your book/paper/whatever coming along, sweetie?

[Anonymous No.4864734]

>>4864683
I worked at my university's lit magazine. My aforementioned reason is EXACTLY why lit magazines still exist, despite the fact that they never turn a profit. You dick

[Anonymous No.4864762]

>>4864734
What's your point exactly? You have yet to convince you know anything about the academic journal biz.

[Anonymous No.4864795]

>>4864762
The dude just said he worked on the a lit magazine. That literally gives him more ethos than anyone else in this entire thread up to this point.

[Anonymous No.4864796]

>>4864795
Fuck my grammar is terrible. I meant to say, "he worked on a lit magazine."

[Anonymous No.4864797]

>>4864795
>That literally gives him more ethos
lol are you fucked in the head?

[Anonymous No.4864801]

>>4864797
Can you argue without flippant bullshit and actually address why what I said is wrong? Then maybe explain your point? Right now you're just shit posting.

[Anonymous No.4864802]

>>4864796
>he worked on a lit magazine=/=knowing anything about academic journal publishing

Just because someone makes pornos, doesn't mean they know how to write the screenplays for psychological thrillers.

[Anonymous No.4864816]

>>4864802
He was arguing as to why literature magazines are still in print. The problem with what you are saying is to suggest that he has zero knowledge of the topic. While he might not be the final authority, chances are that since he has experience he knows something about the topic. He has been a part of the community that would understand the subject so it follows that he would have to know something about it.

[Anonymous No.4864824]

are you guys still arguing? i'm trying to get onionring to post nudes

[Anonymous No.4864867]

>>4864555
>>4864585

post link to essay!

let the learned determine your status as "genius"

[Anonymous No.4864902]

successful troll is successful

[Anonymous No.4864935]

>>4864555
I feel your pain. Also

>dropping terms like "biological essentialism" without defining them or making clear the reason for using them

With all the time they spend waxing poetical about some trivial point or another, why couldn't they take just a sentence or two to define a term and be explicit about what view they're attacking or what line of argumentation they are making?

[onionring !Rrxa7zePwI No.4864966]

>>4864720
doing ok. in the third trimester

[Anonymous No.4864973]

>>4864966
are you as haughty about your work as before or has academia humbled you?

[Anonymous No.4864984]

>>4864555
>Decide to look up professor's published works before final paper is due to check out his writing style and any sources he has that I could use for my own
>Find one of his shorter papers on JSTOR and start reading it
>Acronyms that are never defined or explained
>Run-on sentences
>Incorrect usage of words (main one I can remember off the top of my head now is using "ambivalent" to mean not caring)
>No clear introduction that explains where the fuck he is going with this paper
>No thesis of any kind (this wasn't a literature review either)
>One of these dumbass "hurr I need to do more research" conclusions without giving any explanation or summary about what the fuck the last 15 pages he wrote should mean to anyone inside or outside his academic field
Why the fuck are academics allowed to get away with this shit? I thought this shit was supposed to be peer reviewed and edited. Why is it (from my experience at least) that in a classroom setting professors will explain how to write papers for their class and yet blatantly follow none of their own fucking rules when getting published? Yes I mad.

[onionring !Rrxa7zePwI No.4864990]

>>4864973
i'm pretty humble now. was probably a bit crazy when i posted here in the past.

[Anonymous No.4865005]

>>4864984
>"hurr I need to do more research" conclusions without giving any explanation or summary about what the fuck the last 15 pages he wrote should mean to anyone inside or outside his academic field

This can be sort of forgivable depending on the field. In the sciences at least there might be something interesting about their methods even if they establish nothing by the end of the paper.

[Anonymous No.4865028]

>>4864984
>professors will explain how to write papers for their class and yet blatantly follow none of their own fucking rules when getting published?

Welcome to academia! Trust me, if this upsets you, best not go further down the hole to find out how it all really works.

I'm almost positive a girl I wrote a love poem to sucked the dick of our professor to get a commendable letter of recommendation.

[Anonymous No.4865036]

>>4864990
aw, i kind of liked that about you. are you still full naturalist or what? have you read anything interesting in your field lately?

[Anonymous No.4865047]

>>4864555
>spanish class
>profe: the metaphor in this poem is x
>it's a symbol, not a metaphor
>nearly fail class because this gringo can't understand lit concepts 101

srsly. fuck the humanities. it's why I switched to math. I don't have ego stroke my profs anymore. math is nothing other than "did you prove it or not?"

[Anonymous No.4865055]

>>4864990
ur still p.fuckin stupid tho

[Anonymous No.4865070]

>>4865036
If keep asking questions about herself maybe she'll agree to drive all the way to your mother's house and fuck you in the basement. Keep living the dream man

[Anonymous No.4865073]

>paying actual money to learn from these dunces

I laffed

people who study liberal arts should be culled for military enlistment, they obviously are worthless to society

[Anonymous No.4865083]

>>4865070
i know it seems subversive as fuck to call out white knights when you first get "red pilled" or whatever, but onionring was a goat poster and genuinely knows what she's talking about unlike half of you retards.

[Anonymous No.4865084]

there are undergrad journals. dunno might be able to submit to that and then establish an academic bg to publish in a regular journal.

[Anonymous No.4865094]

>Creates his/her own "conceit" or "axiom" which they refer back to, this creating their own "dialectic" to understanding the literature under question

In my estimation, this is, hands down, the worst garbage in academia. These tinkertwats build up a secret code--apropos of nothing--and there seems to be no reason for it except to create a false rite of passage to keep out the uninitiated (people who haven't read or don't subscribe to the author's argument).

[Anonymous No.4865105]

>>4865083
you're calling him an MRA misogynist grand KKK wizard of i hate women because he told you to stop derailing the thread into a pathetic ':^) i like u, u seem so interesting' shit for a female tripfag, like thousands of newfag /b/tards have done since time immemorial?

stop being a pussy you pussy

[Anonymous No.4865115]

>>4865047
>math is nothing other than "did you prove it or not?"
Oh boy...

[Anonymous No.4865126]

>>4865105
>engaging a smart person without being predictably vile
>derailing

i'm sorry i'm normal and healthy and more well endowed than you.

[onionring !Rrxa7zePwI No.4865242]

>>4865055
why is that

[Anonymous No.4866267]

I don't even tell people how much more I knew than my professors. They wouldn't believe that it's possible. Not because I'm some sort of genius, but because that's how mediocre my professors were. Like middle-of-the-road secondary school teachers but with huge salaries.

But the average reading SAT at my school was like 550 so I guess that's why.

[Anonymous No.4866281]

>>4866267
>But the average reading SAT at my school was like 550
lol where did you go devry institute?

[Anonymous No.4866351]

>>4864555
An axiom or conceit that they refer back to??
Do you mean a thesis statement? Are you talking about a thesis statement? You are, right?

And sentences that have no subtext?
Academic articles rarely have subtext--- when they do, it's usually not a good thing. If an academic essay has subtext, it's probably because the author is inadvertently brushing up against a theory they know nothing about or just forgot to consider.

For example, an essayist might write about the relationship between capitalism, Nietchze, and the character of Don Draper Mad Men, never really discussing the role of women in the show. At some point in their discussion, they will probably make some sort of comment that has misogynistic implications, even though they never set out to be an anti-feminist. This might appear subtextually.

"Obvious filler"
This above statement really prickles my pears and is indicative of a big problem regarding how the public views professors.

What qualifies you to claim something is nonsensical or filler? The paper you were reading was probably written by someone who spent several years studying the subject. Perhaps you are unable to see the connections between seemingly disparate things.

And most importantly: some people improve as writers. My thesis is out there on a server and I know it sucks. I've become a better writer since I published it. Perhaps the essay your professor wrote is one of their earliest publications.

. It should all be "text," right there in the open for you.

[Anonymous No.4867880]

you could cut down most papers to a fraction of the size. Maybe the truth about postmodernism is that the academics flocked to it because it allowed them to do whatever they want and get paid for it.

Really, the state of humanities work being produced today is shameful

[Anonymous No.4867899]

>>4864555

'>555
>trips
Nice.

Well said, and true.

I dropped my philosophy dual major because I was wasting my energy reading essays in contemporary analytic epistemology when I could be reading classics.

How backwards is that? Study philosophy in an American university and you probably will be reading more academic articles than actual works of classical and modern philosophy.

[Anonymous No.4867927]

>>4867899
Go to a great books school.

Seriously, at the college I'm at proffessors will run you out the door if you use secondary sources. The general rule for class is: don't mention the introduction by [insert scholar here] because no one read it.

[Anonymous No.4867946]

>>4867927

What university do you go to?

I was at Arizona State University.

[Anonymous No.4867953]

>>4867946
Shimer College.

[onionring !Rrxa7zePwI No.4870002]

>>4867899
eh, epistemology is alright. besides the herping about gettier and related stuff.

[Anonymous No.4872212]

>>4864573
>tfw your female professors have all been bro-tier legitimate scholars with zero-tolerance for the kind of waffling bullshit you just described.

I don't even know how it happened.

Feels good, man.

[Anonymous No.4872241]

>>4864555
>I have an essay that could revolutionize
No you don't.

[Anonymous No.4872252]

>>4870002

But that's all my contemporary epistemology class was, anon: Gettier cases.

We didn't even read Descartes.

[Anonymous No.4872273]

>>4867953

Hey man, I live in Chicago and am actually looking for a new university (stopped at ASU after two years).

Shimer looks right up my alley. I'm just going to take a shot in the dark here: would you mind skyping with me to discuss the college?

[Anonymous No.4872341]

>>4872252
Descartes isn't contemporary, retard.

[Anonymous No.4872355]

>>4872341

Yeah, I kinda realized that I misspoke: the class was simply called "Theory of Knowledge" but our (single) book was called Contemporary Debates in Epistemology, a Blackwell publication.