• the profession

I had been trying tonight to find out about rumors of a shakeup at the Sage journal Political Theory, and came across this blog In case you're not aware, political theorists (especially those with an historical rather than formal bent) are sort of treated in Political Science like rhetoric people in Communication departments. So I imagine that this blog is somewhat distinctive compared to other academic blogs that allow anonymous comments about the job market/profession, given a sort of circling the wagons mentality. Anyway, while browsing through (there are separate sections for junior job searches, senior, etc) the advice section on choosing a graduate program I ran into this item (corroborated by several other anonymous posters--although I'm in no position to confirm accuracy):

"Yale is a difficult place to be as a graduate student: If you work closely with either Benhabib, Smith or Shapiro, its very hard to get any one of the others to pay attention to you. They dislike each other so much that getting a dissertation committee together can be tricky. I learned this from painful experience..... It is no accident that none of the theory students admitted last year wound up coming here. After visiting and taking in the level of collegiality among the senior theorists, they all decided to go elsewhere."

Now, I happen to be familiar with the work of Seyla Benhabib, Steven Smith, and Ian Shapiro, and admire all of them. I've certainly worked in departments that have had moments of dysfunction, but this strikes me as extreme, and yet I hear about it more frequently among more elite institutions. Again, my knowledge is limited, but I wonder if this sort of thing goes on for years at a top law firm or medical practice? I have my doubts. I'm not sure why it's bothering me so much, other than the cruelty inflicted upon graduate students seems to me the worst sort of sin. Perhaps I don't understand the seeming ingratitude of the wildly successful. Any thoughts?

Afterthought: I would not have chosen this example if the three people mentioned were not so prominent and presumably capable of taking care of themselves. My other question is whether this sort of transparency is generally a good thing, or is it just another mechanism by which the internet too easily spreads dangerous falsehoods.

• Jim Aune's blog
• Login or register to post comments