The haps on the craps pt. 2

Let me start by saying this...I have three people responsible for advising me through my program. There's the big guy who gives out the jobs (or doesn't give them out as the case may be), the man in charge of my actual movement through the program (the guy who doesn't think I've read more than three books), and the guy in charge of my qualifying exam.

In previous posts, you may have realized that, though I like the second guy as a human being, his advice can be, at times, sort of unhelpful. I am also still reeling from the fact that he handed me off to the third guy because I wanted my qualifying exam to be about ghost stories rather than African American Ghost Stories.

This is all sort of important as last week I went to school to make an appointment with guys 1 and 3. I went to 3 first, and as such did not have a chance to go to 1. The reason I wanted to talk to 1 is because I am the only American Studies student with a master's degree that hasn't gotten a job teaching literature outside of Winter session. In fact, even among those students who do not have an MA, the rate of getting lit jobs is positively too high for me to consider this a coincidence. There are people without any degree in English whatsoever who are getting literature teaching positions over me. Why? I don't know. I have noticed, however, that the head of our Graduate Employment Organization (GEO) as well as most of the department stewards seem to be routinely kept in lit jobs. But I'm bitter, and I'm digressing. Besides, everyone gets their turn through the system so maybe its just their turn (except for the fact that the graduate student president of GEO has gotten a lit teaching position every semester since I've been here, and I don't even know if the guy has a master's degree).

Regardless, I saw guy #3 first, so I haven't got a chance to talk to #1. I talk to him tomorrow. Wish me luck. I have had a total of 2 conversations with him so far.

What I did with #3 was this, I brought him my list of 15 "works" to be tested on for my Qualifying Exam (QE, for short). This is my fourth list of 15 works. That's funny on so many levels. If you're reading this--can you think of 15 ghost stories? You can use movies, literature, puppet shows, shit you've heard, it doesn't matter. Can you? Right, and I've been studying it for a year now, and I still can't get a list okay'd.

So, here's how the conversation goes:

me: I just feel like this is a specter hanging over me. I mean it's ludicrous. Fifteen sources. This should have been done last year.

#3: Well, I wouldn't want you to feel like this was some big thing that you had to get past.

me: I just get the idea that maybe I'm not getting lit jobs because of this?

#3: I don't know. I don't really even know how that works. But this is nothing big.

Note: no one except #1 will ever actually admit to knowing how the hiring practices work. If they did, they would have to confront the departmental nepotism towards the labor studies people.

me: Cool, cool. Well, it sounds like we're on the same page. Here's my list.

#3: Well, this third category--"19th century ghost stories" sounds fine. The first category though....

...here it comes

#3 (cont'd): it's not very interdisciplinary is it? You have this ghost story of New Orleans?

Me: Yeah, and a study of the Haunted Mansion from Disneyland, a ghost tour of New Orleans, interviews with my mother concerning the haunted house she lived in as a child in New Orleans.

#3: Yes, but New Orleans. Someone is apt to ask "why New Orleans?"

Me: Because its a city with a tourist industry based on ghost stories.

#3: Yes, I see that. I'm just wondering if there's some way to make that clear and to suggest a methodology of interdisciplinary scholarship.

Me (finally catching on): Well, what if I changed the title of that area from "New Orleans" to something like "The narrative situatedness in creating 'Place'"

#3: Yes, that would be good. Then you could situate it in theories of Landscape(...currently big at our school for no reason)

Me: Would I...would I have to add a theoretical book to give the section a framework.

#3: Hmmm....

Me: I mean, I think that I would prefer to talk about the work already situated in the framework, or else the QE becomes an exam about theoretical frameworks and not about ghosts, per se.

#3: No, I think this will be okay, I was just looking at your next section.

(note: remember, the QE is no big deal)

#3 (cont'd): "The Ghost Story in Context." Context is such a big word. A context could be anything.

Me: Sure. What about discursive formations of credibility for the ghost story.

#3: Yeah, I think that would be better.

So, here it is: in the end I changed two titles of sections and got the go ahead to type this up in order to find two more committee members to fight with. Of course, this thing is no big deal so it will probably only delay my graduation by a couple of years as I find ways to navigate the various needs of the committee(to the wife: that's an exaggeration, honey, relax). So, hurdle 1 jumped.

Now I just have to see if in this program that's attempting to teach me how to be a literature professor I will ever get the opportunity to stand in front of a live classroom and teach literature. I've been thinking about changing my degree to a Ph.D. in composition and rhetoric, but then I'm afraid I'll get classes in basket weaving to teach.