I am of at least two minds about my life as a wanna-be academic and a Vox-Nova contributor. The most practical question is whether I should include my Vox-Nova writing on my CV. There are those who insist that I should include it (along with my music, in some minds). There are others who wish I would stop writing here altogether, or at least keep it as hidden as possible.
The truth is, if adding Vox-Nova to my CV will produce a job, then, I’d include it. If not, then, the converse.
The next question I come across is this: Where I should publish what? I often avoid publishing book reviews here, for example, because they take a long time and I prefer to publish them elsewhere. I want to make them “count.” On the other hand, there are things I have written here that mean more to me than anything I have published in peer-reviewed journals.
Recently, I had a paper that I have presented in two different places rejected for publication, twice. I like the paper because it is different from some of my other writing. Strangely enough, it is a direct—verbatim in some cases—outgrowth of some of my writing here at Vox-Nova.
Some of my colleagues like the paper very much, but even they admit that it is probably too wild for academia. The most generous reviewers gave it a thumbs-up for insight and questions raised, but a thumbs-down for not seeing the argument to the bitter end. And they are mostly right. As I see it, the role of journals is to pollinate the minds of others with insights and questions, as long as they are not less than half-baked and come out with style and verve.
What non-blog-savvy academics don’t know is this: People actually read this stuff! Not just a few insular specialists, but people from all over the place. Even some who get here by sheer accident.
Now, having an audience is never a good reason to write, or do anything else I can think of, all on its own. But, it seems to me, that as far as the purposes of being an intellectual go, if an academic wants to have an effect in the world, then, blogging might be as worldly as it gets.
This, of course, is its greatest weakness too. But, to those who dismiss blogs altogether, think of this: Most people are reading/watching popular magazines or television. At least here at Vox-Nova, and many other places too, one of these things is not like the other.
My academic hero, William James, mostly wrote book reviews and letters-to-the-editor. (Many times he did so under the pseudonym, Ignoramus.) Most of his books were originally popular lectures given before crowds of all types. He shared Tolstoy’s admiration for the rugged worker, the person of the earth.
I know that I will never have the effect of either of those two intellectual giants, but, in the meantime, I have come to these two beliefs about the topic at hand:
1.) My academic profile, my CV, my “academic homepage”—my identity as a wanna-be-academic, a man of leisure—all of this is purely instrumental, like the money it gives or withholds from me and my family. I can be an intellectual with or without it. As undesirable as that may seem right now.
2.) My truest desire is to cultivate a life that might learn from and teach others how to exist as a human person, in the deepest and truest sense, using whatever I have to offer—be it overrated credibility from years of study, publication in a journal or at a blog, honest conversation over a beer or four, or the gut-wrenching discipline of silence.
Because of these beliefs, I now have two kinds of CV; one with and the other without Vox-Nova. (I still am unconvinced that music should be included at all.) Also, I am going to publish my much-maligned paper here in the weeks to come as a four-part series. Sad as it is on some levels, it will likely be read more here than there anyway.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In