Robert Blake Should Have Played Golf

A few days ago I opined that most of a young woman's male friends would like to be more than friends. On the flip side, many men that are more than friends, specifically husbands who've been married a while, would like to be less. While divorce is an obvious option in extreme situations, there are a myriad of coping strategies for the rest, which may ultimately reduce to fight or flight options. Between the incessant battling and the milktoast "yes dear" poles exist many classic male avoidance strategies. Whether it's putting in more time at work, frequenting the local tavern, or hibernating in the cellar workshop, after the "honeymoon" period many men find themselves desirous of taking the occasional or frequent break from their mate. For example, why do you think golf was invented? A game that takes half a day to play without wives or significant others? An obvious male artifice to have a brief respite in which to enjoy himself. Most men seek peace. Too many women do not understand that they would be much closer to men if they were not so close to them. Had Mrs. Blake let Robert play golf, she might be alive today.*

*What is wrong with those California juries?

About Grading and Writing

In a previous post (11/16/05), I outlined the essence of the grading scale used by many professors:
A: The professor did not hate evaluating the item,
B: You have made an intelligible point- almost any intelligible point will do,
C: You have followed directions,
D: You have failed to follow directions,
F: You are speaking in tongues.

Professors complain incessantly and invariably about the quality of students' writing. We share the most comical and frustrating examples with each other, grouse about it in hallways and meetings, and lament the perceived shortcomings as symptomatic of the decline of student quality and civilization in general. You have no idea how much poor writing bothers us.

Probably the most important direction, requisite to receive a "C" or better, is to write properly. Whether explicitly stated or not, this direction is an expectation that constitutes the sine quo non of your grade. You may think that it is content that is critical, with form a secondary concern. Guess again, Paco. Not only is proper writing required to express yourself and allow your thoughts to be comprehended by the reader, the quality of the writing itself signals the reader as to the quality of your thoughts. "Halo" and "Pitchfork" effects are alive and well in academia, and like it or not most professers will infer your grasp of the subject, if not your general intelligence, from the quality of your communication, a large part of which is the propriety of your writing.

If you care about your grade, and sadly some of you care about little else, don't insult the professor or yourself by turning in a shoddily scribed work; the professor will hate evaluating the item, will not be able to discover an intelligible point, and will recognize (and be annoyed by the fact) that you did not follow directions, leaving the grading options as "D" or "F," the distinction often determined by the professor's level of patience and compassion. Of course, if you are at a tuition-driven private college or in graduate school, the grading scale essentially omits the "D" and "F" options, leaving the "gentleman's C" for the private school, and the "failing C" for the graduate program (which often allows two or so of these Mulligans).

In preparing your work for submission (and do as I say, not as I do here), start by hitting the spellcheck now and then. Next, when you see those red and green underlines generated by your word processing program, at least consider why they're there. Finally, when you think you're done, check it one more time to proof it. And don't be afraid to tap into your resources for help.

Beyond the mechanics of correcting mistakes, there are the more crucial issues of the process and attitude of composition. I just erased a couple of paragraphs describing the writing process, not only because this is a blog and not a training manual, but because your college doubtlessly has many fine resources to help you with writing that far exceed my paltry expertise. Rather, let me close with a word on attitude. Your assignments, exams, et al. are in effect professional submissions. Treat them as such. We do.

"Platonic" Friends? Listen well, young women!

Teenage girls and young women, listen well: 80% of your male friends (except the gay ones; if you can't tell, look at their shoes) want to be more than friends. As you age, the percentage will decrease, with the break-even point maybe somewhere around 40 years old or so, but those of you there likely know this. It's the younger women that haven't figured it out yet, and protest the most vociferously at the notion that the males, given the opportunity, would like to be more than friends.

Now make no mistake that there are 20% that are truly your friends, and true friends at that, likely truer and more sincere than most of your female friends. But the vast majority want to be more than friends. Sometimes they are hanging out, just trying to figure out where their "window of opportunity" is. Sometimes they are very shy and unable to find the courage to proclaim their feelings for you. Sometimes the relationship has gone past the friendship point of no return, as that early chance for romance, before the relationship was defined, is in the rearview mirror. Sometimes they currently have a girlfriend/wife, and have the scruples to honor that commitment and are relegated to the fantasy that cannot be. Sometimes they know you have a boyfriend and are just waiting it out. Sometimes it's just hormones. Sometimes they start as friends without wanting to be more but find themselves developing feelings for you. Sometimes... well, I hope you get the idea. Yes, I know my assertions are pretentious, but I am not "projecting," and I'm right (for a change) about this!

As for the reverse, where women want to be more than friends, I suspect it is a far smaller percentage, but frankly I have no idea. Maybe some of you can leave comments to help with that part. In any case, gentlemen, reveal your hearts, and ladies, listen to words unspoken.

The Shirtless Guy

I read today of the "Shirtless Guy" on the campus of Chapman University in southern California (0f course). This lad's 15 minutes derive from cruising campus with only painted nipples north of the equator. Even odder, a campus club "Dedicated to the Fellow Without a Shirt" has formed with over 500 members. Let's give these club members the benefit of the doubt, despite the LaLaLand locale, as just having a bit of quirky fun.

Having taught at San Diego State for 9 years I am no stranger to the "dude" mentality, or lack thereof. But what prompts SG's particular form of narcissism? Such a plastic pursuit of individualism is innocuous enough despite the distasteful disregard for others, i.e., bad manners. As contrived and self-absorbed though this "self-expression" may be, I suppose it isn't hurting anyone else beyond its obvious incivility. Then again, it isn't helping anyone else either.

Is it better to have loved and lost, than never to have loved at all?

I have no idea, and in fact am not entirely sure whether it is better to have loved and lost or to have loved and won. These are frequent discussions with my niece, whose revolving door paramour policy and intense desire to be married (after all, at 25, she's "not getting any younger" and is "falling behind schedule") create incessant discussions about "relationships." She seems genuinely surprised and distraught at each of the latest break-ups, as she thought "this could have been the one." I keep telling her, at these times as well as the dawning of the latest romance made in heaven, that almost all relationships will and must end, so just enjoy the ride, try to get off at the right stop, and wait for the next bus. She sees this as "harsh," but statistics are on my side. How many does one date before (if) marrying? How many marriages survive? How many of those surviving marriages can really be characterized as happy? And for the infinitesmal number that remain, how many are lucky enough to have their spouse die first? Do the math: if you date 50 people before marrying, and half of marriages fail with 20% of those that stay together happy, and there's a 50% chance that your spouse will die first, that's an at best one in a thousand chance that the current light of your life will bring you the eternal bliss you seek and perhaps expect. So accept the transience of love, enjoy it while it's there, and get out while you can.

Alas, I have come to this liberating epiphany far too late, but it's not too late for the 21-25+ year olds I see in class. I wish I could discuss stuff like this with them, though it would probably sound like the embittered pontifications of a cynical old man. After all, what meaning does carpe diem have for the immortal and omniscient youth?

A lot of college, like life, is just following directions.

From kindergarten to college to career (and, sadly perhaps, for husbands), a good deal to achieving success is simply following directions. In college, students seem to constantly be trying to figure out "what the professor wants" on assignments, exams, etc. It's quite simple; here's how we grade:

A: The professor did not hate evaluating the item*
B: You have made an intelligible point- almost any intelligible point will do
C: You have followed directions
D: You have failed to follow directions
F: You are speaking in tongues

*This is purposely nebulous, as in our age of grade inflation (a subject for another blog, perhaps), there is tremendous variation in the standards for and frequency of "A" grades. For example, for an education major (again, for another blog), all that's needed to achieve an "A" is a pulse and a pen (and the pulse isn't critical).

The message here is that to do well in college, just do what the professor tells you to do. The directions are not difficult to locate. They are in syllabi, at the tops of exams, verbalized in class and online, etc. Just read, listen, and if you're not sure, ask. And be sure to ask in the proper manner, that is, follow the directions.

"Professors are so petty because the stakes are so low." -an old academic aphorism

I remember a quarter of a century ago, in my first year of full-time teaching as an instructor in the last year of my doctoral program, sitting in a faculty meeting where the topic of the day was essentially "Can we increase the number of credits per class so we don't have to teach as many classes?" While the infinite bounds of self-interest never cease to amaze, this was nonetheless an eye-opener to the priorities of too many academics.

It is not surprising to encounter the "student as annoyance" mentality at research institutions, but you'd like to think that those at teaching schools are a bit more responsible, if not altruistic. Today I cancelled one class and added another for the upcoming semester. Hardly an unusual activity for a department chair, and one that ultimately will be appreciated by students who are in a bind and need the class to graduate. What students could not see were the myriad of machinations that finally led to this solution for having too many students for too few seats. The logical solution would have been to simply add a few more students- probably not more than three- to the existing four sections, and problem solved. In fact, the instructor for one of the sections was willing to take up to five more, but the instructor for the other three sections was not. The rationale given, as expressed in a faculty meeting, was that raising the number of students would lower the quality of instruction. While this truism likely applies to almost every class, the thinly veiled argument cloaked the real issue that even a minimal increment in workload, despite being of great benefit to students, would require a marginal increase in effort from the instructor. The cloistered response, then, was students be da--ed if it causes me any more work, but let me hide this in the hypocrisy of defending student learning (hardly suprising from a faculty member who will not return student phone calls, though).

Some things never change.