In reading some of the comments on reflexivity and self-disclosure
I realized that a concern with the vulnerable side of our life-and-
work is not just about evaluation of the other, but about evaluation
of ourselves.
It is not simply that when we disclose somethings about our lives that
others may use it to dismiss our work, it is that we use others'
self-disclosures as ways of measuring ourselves. If I present myself
only in terms of successes (which I hope is not the tone or effect
of 'Ideology and me'), I do not offer comfort to those who wonder
if people who succeed are so unlike themselves that they have no
doubts, no failures to report.
I mentioned in another post today that I certainly had doubts
about the worth of doing a PhD, but that was more about the System
than about me.
I am mostly fortunate that my life has built me a pretty self-
confident habitus, my intellectual self-doubts have been probably
too few and far between. This has saved me some agony, and reduced
my vulnerability in a competitive and jealous world where any sign
of weakness is likely to be exploited (sorry, but this is my view
of the experience of many people I know).
Nevertheless, for whatever comfort it may offer to those who are
wondering if a few doubts or failures presage ultimate doom:
As a doctoral student my first time before the Candidacy committee
coincided with the Committee from Hell, and they decided that I
was not yet ready for prime time, though they still passed me with
a Master's degree as consolation prize. Six months later another
committee waved me on my way to dissertating.
When I sought a sponsor to work with, I went to the two top
theoreticians in a high powered department, both of whom told
me they were too full up with students to take me on. Privately
I wondered if they just didn't think I was good enough. I found
someone else to chair my committee, but perhaps part of my decision
ultimately to move on from theoretical physics came from not
being part of the inner circle (as I thought of it), and not as
fanatically inspired to continue in the field as some of my peers.
I took 1-2 years too long, by then current standards, to finish
my thesis, and very nearly lost my support and fellowship.
When I went on the job market it was a very bleak time; many of
my friends left academia altogether. My best prospect was a
post-doctoral appointment in Israel, but the funding for this
fell through (and I missed the '73 war there). I was left completely
without alternatives, and was planning to get a job teaching high school,
until I got a call from New York.
My work in New York took me into a completely different field
(Education). My first couple of papers were rejected by the two
or three journals I sent them to. I really did not understand
the reviewers reports at all. My first conference paper (for AERA)
was likewise rejected, and some of the review reports were rather
insulting (it was a paper on the 'trans-individual nature of
cognition' ca 1975 based on Bateson and applied to education).
I came up for tenure during the bankruptcy of New York City, and
so of the City University. Many of my year-group simply left
without even applying. I survived because both of the other people
in my field happened to retire at that point; my publication
record was not especially strong.
... soon after that things changed rather dramatically in my
career, for the better. I have, of course, left out the strong
points in my record during this early period, but I think it's
reasonable to say that a lot of my academic survival, if not my ultimate
success, was due to a few key individuals who believed in me
and my ideas. As a result, I take very seriously a personal
responsibility to encourage and if possible support new researchers
whom I think are likely to ultimately make valuable contributions,
whether they have the conventional 'successes' of an early
career or not. I feel about the promotion and tenure process,
and even about the journal selection and grant awarding processes
(of which I am a rather established part these days) about
the same way I felt about the rituals of the PhD. They have
very little to do with what I count as real intellectual
talent and achievement. So, be of good cheer all ye who fail and
doubt ... there is hope, and sometimes there is even help. JAY.
JAY LEMKE.
City University of New York.
BITNET: JLLBC who-is-at CUNYVM
INTERNET: JLLBC who-is-at CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU