I’ve recently posted about how much I overload myself. I know I need to stop doing this, but I’m not sure how to. This is because of two parts of my nature. First, my love of constructing theory. I adore writing a new theory, and get excited by it. Second, is my inability to rewrite. It seems so massive. It seems like a high wall that cannot be climbed. Even trying to take it part by part doesn’t work. The excitement is gone by this stage. Both of these characteristics are summarized by this (just replace sale with research project):
God, I am sick.
Quite different from the ideal found over at whatisthewhat. Particularly note the insane shredding of the roll as research project. The original writing is me stroking the roll (oh YEAH!). But I write, construct this (to me) beautiful thing that I know has imperfections, but still, I create this logic. But, in the process, I become JoJo the Idiot Circus Boy. ARGH.
Once I write something and get comments I have a horrible time rewriting. It’s terribly hard for me. I almost just want to throw it out and start from scratch. How do you guys rewrite? Do you have any method to attack the madness?
More than twelve hours later, I still find myself sucking on the thumb of my right hand. The reason? Four glorious hours of Mario Kart Wii with scatterheads and orgtheorists (and a few other random soc bloggers and an eight year-old that consistently kicked my ass).
Last night was my first attempt at Mario Kart. I don’t think anyone has ever been so excited to finish in the middle of the pack (unlike the people who could actually play) . After some races I would celebrate fifth position (those I wasn’t in last). And, there is a perverse joy in knocking over a professor who you have long read and admired with a turtle shell. If you didn’t play this time, you really should try to find a way to play next time. It was a hoot.
Thanks to Killa for letting Mad Slave and I use her apartment (while she’s off skipping around the globe, poor girl, and was not able to play). And, thanks to Mad Slave for teaching me how to play. And Tina for arranging it!
So, I took a time series class this past semester for all of two days. I’m ABD and was signed up for three courses. I always knew I was going to drop one. Due to the unforeseen circumstance of eventually coming to the conclusion that the Prof. for one of the required classes I had left (for statistics, not my PhD in soc) might as well have been speaking Aramaic for all I understood him, I ended up dropping two courses. If I could go back in time, I would have stayed in Time Series, but you live and learn. Anyway, that class got me thinking in terms of seasons. Do we have identities that we cycle in and out of throughout the year? For high school and perhaps undergraduates, there is the student identity. I remember very early on in my BA career truly shucking that over the summer. But, even then, it was something I could draw on if need be (I’m NOT just a McDonald’s worker, I’m a college student — back when that meant something to me).
What would it mean to have a seasonal identity? Would it mean that the identity disappeared? Or, if we think in terms of the identity theory salience hierarchy, does that identity simply shift to the bottom of the pile and we draw on it less often (I am leaning towards that explanation)?
For all of you out there that are visiting this blog and not commenting, seriously, want your help on this one. Can you think of some examples? I’m sure they exist, but beyond student, I’m at a loss for thinking up others.
It seems today is the day for videos. But sometimes, you find ones that just need to be shared. I got this from here by forward from Prof. RFB.
(I Can’t Write No) Dissertation
The Metrics Gang(X’X)ile on Main Street ABD Records
As I have featured at least two stories on GTA4 from members of my brain trust (Killa and Columbus), I wanted to also include this to provide a completely balanced view. While this video is long (about 9 minutes), the treatment and analysis of sex in video games is very enlightening. I found this video over at Boinkology, here.
I perpetually have too much to do and not enough time to do it. I do not think I’m alone on this. I do think, however, that I tend to be a greater part of the problem with this than others. It appears I have no ability to say no to research projects. For this summer I have:
- A network analysis paper to revise and send out
- A paper on emotions (now with my co-author, thank goodness)
- A paper on Wikipedia that we are waiting for vetting on
- Three other papers dealing with business networks for my summer funding
- A project on group negotiation and status characteristics which requires much data analysis, not to mention putting the tapes of groups onto DVD (takes lots of time) and data entry
- A paper to revise and send out on racialization as structural symbolic interaction
- Prepping for my fall class, and my spring class (which will be a different class, ick)
- MY DISSERTATION
Huh, as I keep thinking about this, other things pop up. Like getting my paper ready for ASA. Oh, and there is a paper on the Jena 6 that is supposed to be this summer too. I’m sure there are others.
I’m coming to the conclusion that in order to do all of this, I’ll need to be super human. Especially since I leave for a month and a half for my fellowship (good for the dissertation, but not these other things). But what goes?
How many projects do you all have running at once? I really need to work on getting this number down, but to what?
UPDATE:
PhD Comics once again summarizes my exact feelings on this matter:
Ironically (and sadly), when Jorge Cham came to my university, I was too busy to go see him speak. Blue went though, and brought back autographed copies of the books.
Really. I don’t have scientific data, but if someone lends me chaps, I’ll get some for you just to prove it.
Sorry it took me a while to get back to this. My writer’s block suddenly, and magically lifted. I just finished writing what I think to be a pretty solid theory for a paper with Professor R.F.B. (reason for being at this school, or RFB for short). I need to go back to it, but also needed a break to get some perspective on it as well. You know what I’m say’n?
Alright, in this discussion over at Law and Letters, Anomie says she doesn’t like the idea of the backstage because:
1. Backstage as when you stop managing your impression to others: doesn’t exist because we are always managing our impressions, even to ourselves. Even when alone, we have an internalized other we’re acting towards–a peanut gallery in our heads (It’s really bugging me that I can’t find the citation for this idea. I didn’t make it up on my own). That’s why so few people are comfortable walking around naked in their own homes. Or won’t sing, even when alone. Or control their daydreams.
2. Backstage as when you can be your true self: we have no true self. We are socialized into being and constrained by the etiquettes, morals, and norms that we have internalized. The self is fluid and varies with time and space.
I have no idea who the peanut gallery person is. Sounds pretty generalized other though. So, I’m not contesting it. I, actually, think Goffman would agree. Even when we are backstage in our teams, he argued that we were still managing impressions (in terms of trying to show we were competent to pull off our roles in the front stage). I don’t think the backstage means that you stop managing your impressions the way you think I mean. The difference is that I think that even if we are always managing impression, even to ourselves, we deceive ourselves into thinking that we are not. In general, besides us crazy self and identity people, we think that we do have an authentic self AND I think people generally think that they have a fairly unified self–even if they recognize they have conflicting identities. Telling secrets, seeing each other in pain, sharing inside jokes — those all seem authentic to us. And we believe, to a large extent, that they are. So, fairytale? Perhaps. But, “If men define situations as real, they are real in their consequences.” Yes?
Also, I’m really not sure if I like the whole idea that we do have multiple selves which are fluid and changing. But, perhaps it’s because I’m a graduate student with no real life, and have about 5 roles to my name, instead of the many, many, many roles most normal well adjusted people have.
In other backstaginess, in the same discussion I say to Belle:
Well, and the irony of it all, is that even being pseudonymous is not really being fully backstage. I am managing the impression you develop of me by controlling what I say so you can’t figure out who I am. There are times that I include a detail, think that maybe it is too much, and so go back and delete it. Because of that very concern. Truly, how is that backstage? And yet, another post I had planned.
An example detail? I had originally written in a post that I had a fellowship this summer. I have no idea how I thought that would track to me, but somehow did.
Later, Belle’s advice to me is that if I want to stay backstage then I have to remain pseudonymous. Well, I think after the scatterplot effect died, I’m back to my five readers — all of whom know who I am, either through mad detective skills or being forced to work with me relentlessly on paper after paper (YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE). I did indicate earlier that I would comment on what deciding just to be non-googable meant for my backstage. Here are the implications I think it has:
- I will be much more careful about not mentioning anything bad about the university I am in.
- I will not be mentioning any sociologists or other academics with whom I have problems (I don’t think I woulda done that before, anyway).
I think that’s about it. So, most of you know my name. What does that get you? You can google me. You can find my vitae, find a picture of me and see I have a gap between my two front teeth, find some newsletter things I’ve written, find out that I’ve reviewed for a journal (all of one time), find my ONE current publication on which I’m fourth author, and see that I support statistics. That’s it. Really, what does it tell you about me? Much less than you learn by reading this blog and my comments on yours. So, really, I think not having to worry about letting something slip will actually allow you more into my backstage, fictional or not.
I will still care about getting comments. I will still be slightly obsessed with my statistics. I will still try to be witty and funny, probably beyond my capabilities. I will still be scared shitless to meet all of you f-t-f, besides those of you who know me already. I will still write non-serious posts and think to myself, “it’s probably time for a serious one.” And, no matter what, I will STILL post sans pants. But, assless chaps I will not do… even though I still am drawn to these.
UPDATE: And, another reason to love blogging and worry about the backstage was posted by shakha at scatterplot here. Read the story, seriously.
Blue and I have been married 7 years today and are now in our 8th year of marriage.
All I can say is:
WOOT! We’re better than most the marriages out there!* Yeah! Go us! Looks like we don’t need this policy.
Ok, it’s not much to hold on to for self-esteem. It’s kind of like deriving feelings of self-worth from watching The Maury Show (at least I would know who my theoretical baby daddy was).
*Family sociology is SO not my area. Looking around for statistics, it appears that there is now a two year itch (way past that), and the average length of marriage is 8 years. But including all the crap would really not allow me to celebrate–so let’s take off our sociological hats and just be happy for us. K?
