James writes:
"My point, ultimately, is that the bounds need to be pushed for change to
emerge in the work we do, but that such pushing, if it does not acknowledge
in an informed and mature way the longstanding history and tradition of the
particular genre(s), may not find much success. Powerful is the scholar
who can push the bounds in a way that excites both traditionalists and
innovators."
Couldn't have said it better.
"Pushing the bounds" requires using our teaching skills in the service of
our academic goals. As students at any level, we can't just ignore or treat
like luddites those who don't know what we're talking about. To do so puts
us in an egocentric, adolescent frame of mind. We have to think about why
others may resist what we're doing and find ways of connecting so that we
can at least find common ground and maybe persuade a few to look into what
we're doing.
Why should we? Well, the obvious answer is that these are the people in a
position to move your project along, write letters for you or even hire you.
My answer is why shouldn't we? Why shouldn't we try to understand the other
and give respect to the hardwork that others have done, regardless of
medium? I'm not saying that we should turn our critical brains off and
become nodding sycophants--I'm just saying that when we create something new
and unusual, we have to anticipate that others will find it (and us) odd and
maybe frightening. We have to develop the capacity to anticipate their
fears and to deal with these fears.
And who am I to be saying all of this? Just a recovering adult
adolescent--someone who has trolled the emotional depths of egocentric angst
for too many years. Someone who realized how she might be coming across to
her professors when she began to have students assuring her that what she
was thinking was old-fashioned and really not the point.
Cheers,
Joanna Howard
* Message sent from Online2K - http://www.furman.edu/~jinman/cw2k/elists/
* Visit URL above to unsubscribe, read archives, and more!