Now I’m George H. W. Bush! Wednesday, Mar 12 2008 

I recently read an article on slate.com entitled “What Psychological Personality Tests Reveal about Clinton, Obama, and McCain.” According to this writer’s speculations, Clinton is an ESTJ, or a “Guardian,” someone who is “steadfast, cautious, methodical.” Obama is an ENFP, or a “Champion,” someone who can easily motivate people around them through their enthusiasm and idealism. McCain is an ESTP, or an “Artisan,” someone who needs to have a piece of the action. (Coincidentally, the current president is also an ESTP.)

This reminded me of taking the Myers-Briggs personality test while I was in graduate school. It became a way to link composition students personalities to their learning styles, of helping them identify their own strengths and weaknesses as students. We instructors also took the test to try out the linkage for ourselves.

With this in mind, I took an online version of a similar test. According to this test, I am an ISTJ. Here’s how one website describes ISTJs:

ISTJs are often called inspectors. They have a keen sense of right and wrong, especially in their area of interest and/or responsibility. They are noted for devotion to duty. Punctuality is a watchword of the ISTJ. The secretary, clerk, or business(wo)man by whom others set their clocks is likely to be an ISTJ.

As do other Introverted Thinkers, ISTJs often give the initial impression of being aloof and perhaps somewhat cold. Effusive expression of emotional warmth is not something that ISTJs do without considerable energy loss.

ISTJs are most at home with “just the facts, Ma’am.” They seem to perform at highest efficiency when employing a step-by-step approach. Once a new procedure has proven itself (i.e., has been shown “to work,”) the ISTJ can be depended upon to carry it through, even at the expense of their own health.

ISTJs are easily frustrated by the inconsistencies of others, especially when the second parties don’t keep their commitments. But they usually keep their feelings to themselves unless they are asked. And when asked, they don’t mince words. Truth wins out over tact. The grim determination of the ISTJ vindicates itself in officiation of sports events, judiciary functions, or an other situation which requires making tough calls and sticking to them.

His SJ orientation draws the ISTJ into the service of established institutions. Home, social clubs, government, schools, the military, churches — these are the bastions of the SJ. “We’ve always done it this way” is often reason enough for many ISTJs. Threats to time-honored traditions or established organizations (e.g., a “run” on the bank) are the undoing of SJs, and are to be fought at all costs.

This seems to describe me fairly well. I can certainly seem aloof at first, and I definitely have a sense of right and wrong, especially when it comes to following prescribed rules and procedures. I also have an “institutional” way of thinking.

(more…)

Good Intentions Monday, Mar 3 2008 

A couple of weeks ago we had a really strange department meeting. We were ostensibly meeting to discuss a job hire, but after only about 10 minutes or so about the potential hire’s qualifications, the conversation turned to discussion of other issues. In answer to a colleague’s question, I said something that I will admit was poorly worded. Another colleague objected to my statement, even going so far as to imply that I was being racist, which I think was a rather perverse twisting of what I had said (but of course I would say that if I were a racist!).

Anyway, ever since that meeting this song has been on constant play in my head:

I thought this clip’s setting of Nina Simone to images of racism and the equal rights struggle was ironically appropriate given the context!

I think “Don’t Let Me Be Misunderstood” is my new theme song when it comes to department meetings. Maybe I should bring it with me next time and play it throughout the meeting!

ASECS: A Review Friday, Apr 6 2007 

Two weeks ago I was in Atlanta for the annual meeting of the American Society for Eighteenth-Century Studies. I presented a paper on the first day of the conference and chaired a session that I had put together on the last day. On the whole, I think it was a very good conference, professionally much better than GEMCS in February (though GEMCS was more fun).

My paper, which was entitled “Turks and the Exclusion Crisis: Revising Representation, Partisanship, and Political Culture in Aphra Behn’s The False Count,” analyzed Behn’s depictions of “Turks” in her 1681 comedy. (They’re not actually Turks; they’re Spanish men in disguise.) I think it went pretty well. In general, the most useful part of going to a conference is just that it forces you to write the paper, to get your thoughts down. I like it well enough to spend some more time on it and see if it goes anywhere. I received some very positive response from people who heard the paper. For a day or two, I kept running into people who had been in the audience and who continued to say good things about it. So that was nice.

I thought the most interesting paper on the panel (besides mine, of course) was Chris Gabbard’s “‘The wit may be somewhat trimmed’: Mental Disability in Thomas Willis’s The Soul of Brutes.” This paper demonstrated that at least one writer, Willis, offered an alternative vision of people with mental disabilities than that posed by Locke in the late seventeenth century. It was a fascinating paper and subject.

I heard a few other good papers. (I went to about 6 or 7 panels total over the course of the conference, which I’m pretty sure is a record for me. Usually, I just go sightseeing and drink too much.) I enjoyed Patricia Chapman’s “Laureate and Whore Debate Dramatic Theory: Shadwell, Behn, and the Poet’s Purpose.” Chapman compared these two playwrights’ theories of drama to (kind of) show that Behn’s was better (at least that’s what I got out of it, though I am admittedly reducing her argument to something she didn’t really intend).

(more…)

Teaching Faggots by Larry Kramer Wednesday, Apr 4 2007 

Today I taught excerpts from Larry Kramer’s 1978 novel Faggots in my Lesbian & Gay Lit course. For the past couple of years I have taught the entire novel in the class, but this time I decided to teach only a small section — mostly the first 30 pages or so — in order to make room for Kramer’s 1985 play The Normal Heart and Wayne Hoffman’s 2006 novel Hard. I’m looking forward to teaching those works for the first time, but I definitely wish I had been able to keep all of Faggots on the reading list.

Faggots Faggots follows its “hero,” Fred Lemish, as he maneuvers his way through the gay scene of 1970s New York City. The novel is extremely graphic and includes detailed descriptions of felching, anal sex, water sports, rimming, douching, oral sex, incest, group sex, S/M, and fisting. Ultimately, Kramer’s point in this novel is to critique the endless and often anonymous sexual encounters of many gay men in the 70s, arguing that this lifestyle is destroying their chances of living more normal, fulfilling, and loving lives.

Not surprisingly, Kramer took a lot of heat for this critique. Here’s what one reviewer writes about the novel:

Kramer has attempted to write a comic sex novel; his model, it is clear, is Portnoy to Holleran’s Gatsby. However, combining intense, John Rechy-type sexual explicitness with broad, crack-timed humor requires the technique of an expert writer, and Kramer is anything but. So his jokes stiff, and his porn goes limp. In fact, he does almost everything wrong. He creates too many characters and gives them farcical names like Randy Dildough and Yootha Truth, so you don’t take them seriously; but then he keeps bringing them back and asking you to care about them when you can’t even remember who they are. He delivers his wit and wisdom in subtle, clever statements like this: “Of the 2,639,857 faggots in the New York City area, 2,639,857 think primarily with their cocks.” He rushes his characters from orgy to orgy with increasingly unfunny running gags in a way that suggests what might happen if Rechy’s The Sexual Outlaw were made into a sitcom by Terrence (The Ritz) McNally.

I don’t really agree with this writer. While its true that Andrew Holleran’s Dancer from the Dance is a much more lyrical book, Faggots makes a much more pointed critique. It’s much more like eighteenth-century satire — think Jonathan Swift — than Dancer is. If we read it from this point of view, I think it has a lot to say to us about a certain portion of 1970s gay male NYC culture as well as about our own attitudes to that past and what’s happened since.

(more…)

Hottie of the Month: Burke Thursday, Mar 29 2007 

Edmund BurkeMy hottie of the month for March is Edmund Burke, the eighteenth-century politician, orator, political theorist, and philosopher. Burke is, perhaps, most famous for writing his Reflections on the Revolution in France, a work I had to read as an undergraduate history major. He is considered one of the fathers of conservatism, a political philosophy he embraced in response to the terrors of the French Revolution and its potential threat to England.

Because of his conservative leanings, I’ve never been particularly interested in him or his writings. Every now and then, I’ve tried to read a few selections from my anthology of Burke’s speeches and writings, but I’ve never been able to make it very far. So, I’m rather surprised to find myself suddenly interested in him and in late eighteenth-century English conservatism more generally.

This interest arose as I was working on my paper for GEMCS this past February. One reference led to another, which led to another, and before I knew it I was rereading parts of Reflections. While working on that paper, I picked up Frans de Bruyn’s “Anti-Semitism, Millenarianism, and Radical Dissent in Edmund Burke’s Reflections on the Revolution in France,” published in Eighteenth-Century Studies in 2001. This excellent and interesting article looks at passages in Reflections in which Burke seems to embrace anti-Semitic rhetoric and attempts to explain the historical context for these passages and how they work rhetorically within Burke’s larger political argument. It’s a very informative essay that led me to another essay on conservatism in the period, which led me to start thinking about various other issues related to my current project.

I doubt that I’ll be teaching Burke any time soon. In fact, I’ve never been assigned him in a literature course (it was a history class that I read Reflections in). And he’s certainly not a major figure in my current project. But I am interested in using him and his writing to illustrate a couple of points about anti-Semitism at the end of the eighteenth century and about conservatism in general. In other words, he’s become quite useful to my project, even if he’s not a major figure in it.

So, I suddenly find myself interested in a political movement, conservatism, and a socio-political circle, one that includes Burke and Richard Cumberland, neither of which I ever thought I’d be writing about. For this reason, and certainly not because of his portrait above, I am celebrating Burke as March’s hottie of the month.

Teaching in a Sauna Tuesday, Mar 27 2007 

My classes started yesterday. Based on first impressions, I think it’s going to be a good quarter. The HTC students might be a little quiet, but the GLBTers will make up for that I’m sure. The GLBT lit class has a lot of students that I already know, either from past classes or from Open Doors. (I also already know half of the HTC students.) It’s always nice (and somewhat affirming) to have repeaters. Ellis Hall

But the main thing that sticks out in my mind about my classes yesterday was the unbearable heat in Ellis Hall. (I’m not quite sure why, but I love this picture of Ellis.) We’re in the transition period between winter and spring, and the thermostat is not quite set for the warmer weather.

Because the building is so hot inside, most of the windows are open, but then the sounds from outside — like lawn mowers during my HTC class — make it difficult to hear in class. There’s a lot to love about Ellis Hall, but the semi-annual temperature problem is not one of them.

Due to the heat, I ended up letting both of my classes go early. I was going to give my HTC class a PowerPoint presentation about eighteenth-century English society and I was going to show my GLBT class a documentary about Stonewall and its aftermath. but it was just too hot to make them (or me) sit there another minute. Sweat was pouring down my back, and I felt like my clothes were sticking to the furniture every time I stood up. I’ve put the PowerPoint presentation on Blackboard, so the HTCers can just look at it there sometime, if they want. I can show the video at a later date — either tomorrow or next week.

Tomorrow will be the first real class for the GLBT class. I’m looking forward to seeing what they make of Stone Butch Blues.  It’s an amazing book. The HTC class doesn’t meet again until Thursday. We’ll be watching Stage Beauty in there. I really like this movie, but I also object to some of its misrepresentations of the period. I just hope Ellis is cooler tomorrow and Thursday!

So, the quarter is off and running. One down, 39 days to go!

Back in Athens and Ready to Go Sunday, Mar 25 2007 

I got back from Georgia a few hours ago. On the whole, being at the conference (ASECS) was really good, and I definitely enjoyed hanging out a bit in Atlanta. My paper went really well on Thursday, which pretty much meant that anything else fun or good was icing on the cake. The panel I put together and chaired also seemed to go well. I’ll try to give my review of the conference sometime this week. I’ll also post about the museum I visited.

But what’s really on my mind is the fact that my sabbatical is completely over starting tomorrow at 1 pm, when I start teaching again! While in Atlanta, I have to admit, I really disliked the idea of going back into the classroom. Don’t get me wrong: I love teaching, and I love many of my students (I love my students, but I don’t love my students). But having the past several months to spend almost unlimited time reading and thinking and writing has been really enjoyable. It wasn’t quite like being on vacation — since I did work a lot.

But now that I’m back in Athens and doing a little prep work for tomorrow — I figure I’ll give my tutorial students a little background about the period, and we’re going to watch a 54-minute documentary about Stonewall and its aftermath in my Lesbian & Gay Lit class — I’m actually feeling a little excited about teaching again.

I’ve long felt that a great deal of my sense of self-worth comes from my teaching. I’m not the best teacher around or anything, but teaching is very invigorating. I love talking with my students about the writers, texts, and issues I love. I love introducing them to my favorite books and authors and hearing what they think about them. I enjoy teaching, and I’m fairly good at it. When my research has been slow or non-existent, I’ve always been able to fall back on my teaching for a sense of accomplishment. It’s going to be interesting to see how I feel about it now that it’s going to interrupt my on-going (and definitely not non-existent) research.

This quarter I’m teaching the eighteenth-century tutorial, which I hope will be a lot of fun. It’s my first time, so I’m anxiously excited to see how it goes. I’m also teaching my GLBT Lit class, which is probably my favorite course to teach each year. Not the least of my excitement comes from knowing that my current crop of favorite former students (most of which have had this class) are graduating — hopefully this quarter will bring me a new set of Brodie “girls.”

I’ve already been so busy in recent weeks that I’ve not had time to blog, so I’m a little worried about whether I’m really going to be able to keep it going, but I hope so. Starting tomorrow, I’m sure I’ll have lots to blog about. So, cheers to the start of a new quarter!

Off to Atlanta Wednesday, Mar 21 2007 

I had hoped to post at least once before heading off to Atlanta for the meeting of the American Society for Eighteenth-Century Studies. Unfortunately, I didn’t get a chance to. When I went to GEMCS last month, I managed to pre-write several posts; no such luck this time.

I present my paper first thing tomorrow morning, so it will be over quickly. I’m chairing a session on Saturday. In between, I hope to hear some interesting papers and see some sights in Atlanta, including the High Museum of Art and maybe the aquarium or the Carter Presidential Library. (PJ and I try to see presidential libraries whenever we get a chance, but it won’t feel right seeing one without him.)

When I get back, I hope to have lots to blog about. I also want to write a few short reviews of movies I’ve seen recently — I think there are four in my mental queue waiting to be reviewed — and, of course, reveal the hottie of the month. And I start teaching again on Monday. I hope I remember how!

Choose Your Own Adventure: Aphra Behn Sunday, Mar 18 2007 

I haven’t had time to post in a week, because I’ve been working on my paper for the American Society for Eighteenth-Century Studies, which meets in Atlanta later this next week. My paper is on Thursday morning, and I’ve been working all week to finish it. I finally finished a complete draft of it, so I can sit back and let it (and my brain) rest for a day before giving it one last once over.

Aphra BehnThe paper is on Aphra Behn’s 1681 comedy The False Count. My interest in the play lies in its depiction of a group of men who disguise themselves as Turks and “capture” an Englishman, his wife, and his daughter. I’m trying to figure out how this play’s representation of “Turks” reflects Behn’s participation in partisan debates on the exclusion crisis.

This is a portrait of Behn. I’ve never really worked on her before, but I have taught two classes on her. During my first year at OU I taught a senior seminar on Behn. It was a fun class, even if some of Behn’s works weren’t all that great. It always amazes me how some works are anthologized while others — better ones — aren’t. In general, the scholars who were the first to champion Behn were also most interested in her plays that feature prostitutes and women who disguise themselves as prostitutes. They analyzed these characters as early, proto-feminist figures. So, some of the plays that are available in print aren’t, in my opinion, her best ones. The False Count is a good example. It’s not anthologized, but it’s a great play. (I also taught a junior composition course on her and her work.)

The Restoration period was once taught as the ‘Age of Dryden;’ we could easily rename it the ‘Age of Behn.’ It’s been fun researching her play and rediscovering some of the historical context that informs her depiction of “Turks.” It reminds me that one of the things I really enjoy about writing is the discovery process. As you read one scholar, s/he introduces you to a new concept or quote or fact; you then follow up on that, which often leads to another new concept or quote or fact. It’s like a game or a choose-your-own-adventure book.

Being on leave for the past two quarters has been extremely helpful to my research. I haven’t completed anything yet, but I’ve gotten some really good reading and thinking done. And it’s put me in a position to finish an article or two (or maybe three) by the end of the year.

I’m looking forward to the ASECS conference. I’m excited to learn some new things and make some new discoveries. If research is a choose-your-own-adventure, I’m ready to start reading a new one!

GEMCS: A Review Wednesday, Feb 28 2007 

I arrived home from Chicago late Sunday night. My flight had been canceled and I had to fly standby in order to get a flight. I really don’t deal well with travel disruptions, so it was a very stressful and tiring day. I still feel fairly exhausted!

I was in Chicago for the conference of the Group for Early Modern Cultural Studies. One of the good things about GEMCS has always been its friendliness to beginning scholars and to scholarship on a wide range of issues — it’s a conference at which graduate students can rub elbows with major scholars and at which papers on gender and queer issues are relatively common. But it also has some inherent weaknesses, the primary one being that papers are short — no more than 15 minutes long. Once you’re an established scholar and want to give a 20- to 30-minute paper on your topic, 15 minutes is extremely difficult to pull off.

The conference went well. I actually attended about 5 sessions — which I think might be a record for me. Usually, I end up being a tourist, hanging out with friends, and spending as much time as possible drunk. So, this past weekend was definitely an improvement in that regard.

I can’t say that I heard very many papers that really excited me (in the sense of wanting to rush out and find out more about the topic). The most interesting paper I heard was from a friend and mentor of mine, Misty. She read a paper on the Methodist evangelist George Whitefield. Her paper was part of a panel on “Queer Cultural Encodings,” and she talked mostly about a confessional autobiography Whitefield wrote. This autobiography certainly made him sound rather queer. After hearing it, I do want to read more about Whitefield and this confessional text.

I also really enjoyed attending my friend Nicole’s panel, a round table discussion on “Literary History, Cultural Studies, and Multidisciplinarity.” The five panelists were interested in discussing questions of interdisciplinary work, New historicism and its alternatives, and the task of doing literary history. They all raised very interesting questions and issues. Later that evening, my friend James and I went to dinner with Nicole and three of the other panelists from her session. I really like them! We had a great time eating, drinking, and chatting. I hope I get the chance to hang out with them again.

My panel had the unfortunate situation of being scheduled on Sunday morning. Not surprisingly, we had only three audience members (two of which were my friends). Nevertheless, I was glad to give my paper. I really think I’m on to something with it — even though the process of writing the paper convinced me that I had previously been reading the play incorrectly. I’m hoping to keep working on it and maybe turn it into an article. I also thought the three papers in my session worked well together thematically.

And finally, while attending a session I looked over and saw one of my former students in the audience. I was surprised to say the least. Sara had been one of our honors students here at OU when I first got here. She’s definitely one of the smartest students I’ve ever taught. I was glad to see her and get a chance to chat a bit. She’s now a Renaissance PhD student at the University of Illinois.

Sometime in the next couple of days, I’ll write more about my visit to Chicago and the socializing I did there. On the whole, I’d say the conference went well. I was disappointed in when my paper was scheduled. But I had fun and just writing the paper was helpful for my larger project. So, on the whole, a good (but not great) conference.

« Previous PageNext Page »