Mickey Rooney (1920–2014)

[“Actor Mickey Rooney scowls into telephone while sitting behind new curved desk with shelves containing ceramic animals (Ferdinand the Bull, Pluto, etc.) which his mother gave him as part of new bedroom/office for his birthday.” Photograph by Peter Stackpole. California, 1939. From the Life Photo Archive.]

Mickey Rooney’s came up three times in our household this weekend. We heard a Jeopardy contestant confuse Mickey with Andy Rooney. We talked about a New Yorker article that mentioned Norman Lear’s interest in Rooney for the role of Archie Bunker in All in the Family. Too risky, Rooney thought. And that led us to consider Mr. Yunioshi of Breakfast at Tiffany’s.

I like musicals just fine. But I remember Rooney more for The Comedian (1957), Requiem for a Heavyweight (1962), and his strange turn in the Naked City episode “Ooftus Goofus” (1961).

The New York Times has an obituary.

“Warner’s” Trade Mark Super 8

[Photograph by Michael Leddy. Click for a larger, bristlier view.]

I’ve been using the Warner’s Super 8 to remove snow from a car for at least thirty-four years. This brush has traveled with me from New Jersey to Massachusetts to Illinois, always in the back of a car. The brush was already old when I carried it off from the family manse. How old? Old. The leather loop that was once attached to the handle is long gone.

What I like best about this brush: its name and logo. I like the very idea of a brush bearing a name. And such a name. And such a design. If my name were Warner, I’d trademark it and write it that way too.

Reinvention and wheels

“Never met a wheel I didn't want to reinvent”: designer and developer Shaun Inman, creator of the free Mac app Day-O.

There is great value in reinventing wheels. And Day-O is a nifty app. As Inman says, it “doesn’t do much of anything ” — just as it should do, or not do.

Spellings of the future

A spelling of the future: my term for a misspelling so strange that it must be traveling backward in time to give us a foretaste of our language’s evolution. Because language is always evolving.


[As seen in print.]

Is it okay to where khaki shorts in a classroom? No. Not ever.

Other spellings of the future
Aww : Bard-wired fence : Now : Off

Plagiarism in the news

Sociologist Zygmunt Bauman is defending himself against charges of plagiarism, saying that “obedience to technical procedural rules of quotations” has nothing to do with the quality of scholarship.

Bauman might better defend himself by taking his cue from Uncle Leo.

Related reading
All OCA plagiarism posts (Pinboard)

[See how easy it is to use quotation marks?]

Sophocles and the news

The terrible events in the news yesterday make it a strange time to be teaching Sophocles’s Ajax.

Adjuncts, baristas, and bookstore cashiers

Writing for The Atlantic, Elizabeth Segran suggests that the prospects for PhDs in the humanities aren’t as bad as all that. Consider the opening sentences:

There is a widespread belief that humanities PhDs have limited job prospects. The story goes that since tenure-track professorships are increasingly being replaced by contingent faculty, the vast majority of English and history PhDs now roam the earth as poorly-paid adjuncts or, if they leave academia, as baristas and bookstore cashiers.

Notice how by moving to an absurd and unsupportable contention — that the majority of English and history PhDs labor as adjuncts, baristas, and cashiers, Segran manages to move right past what is undeniably the case — that tenure-track positions are disappearing, that a majority of college instructors are now adjuncts, that the percentage is rising, and that many (if not most) adjuncts are poorly paid. At any rate, the news in this piece is that “between a fifth and a quarter of [humanities PhDs] go on to work in well-paying jobs in media, corporate America, non-profits, and government. Humanities PhDs are all around us— and they are not serving coffee.”

What Segran fails to acknowledge is that the very telos of doctoral study in the humanities is a life of teaching and scholarship on the tenure-track. That’s what grad school is supposed to be for. And while it may be the case that PhDs are hired outside academia for, as one of Segran’s interviewees says, “their process skills: the ability to do excellent research, to write, to make cogent arguments,” it is far from clear that doctoral study is necessary or even practical in developing such skills. Five or seven or ten years in training to learn how to make a cogent argument? No.

If graduate programs are producing more PhDs than will ever be hired for tenure-track positions (given current institutional priorities in American higher education), the prospect of seeking a PhD looks ever more dubious. That some degree-holders have been able to find worthwhile employment outside academia (usually “through their own networks, without the support of their departments,” Segran says) does little to make graduate study in the humanities more appealing. Imagine going to medical school when the odds are slim that you’ll ever practice. Ladies and gentlemen, start your networks.

A website I discovered not long ago, aimed at audiences in the humanities and social sciences: 100 Reasons NOT to Go to Graduate School. It is a voice of experience. To quote from reason no. 86: “Of course, you look forward to a career — a career in academe. But graduate school can only offer the hope of an academic career. It’s an extraordinarily costly roll of the dice.”

*

3:13 p.m.: To the reader who tweeted that the words “the very telos of doctoral study in the humanities is a life of teaching and scholarship on the tenure-track” sound like “bitter, dusty tweed” and make her “want to vomit”: please, read those words in context and not in the form of someone else’s tweet. The words form not a sentence but part of a sentence. And the sentence expresses a sad truth that Segran doesn’t acknowledge: that doctoral study in the humanities prepares students for a future that many of them will never attain. There’s nothing of tweed (or pipesmoke) in my words: rather, there’s a recognition that “the profession” is for many doctoral students unattainable. None of what I wrote suggests that PhDs should not seek work outside academia. But I think that a doctorate is hardly a necessary preparation for being able to reason and write well.

[I follow The Chicago Manual of Style in typing PhD without periods.]

Butterick’s Practical Typography

“Ty­pog­ra­phy mat­ters be­cause it helps con­serve the most valu­able re­source you have as a writer — read­er at­ten­tion.”

That’s Matthew Butterick writing, from the book-as-website Butterick’s Practical Typography. You may already know Butterick’s name from Typography for Lawyers.

LegalZoom exploits Philip Seymour Hoffman’s death to promote its services

From a LegalZoom e-mail with the subject line “Philip Seymour Hoffman’s Last Will: What We Can Learn”:


[“Change is a part of life. But sometimes, people forget that when it comes to estate planning. Let the late Philip Seymour Hoffman's case serve as a prime example of how important it is to keep your will up-to-date to ensure your wishes can be fulfilled when you pass on.”]

This sales ploy is beyond tasteless. It is in truth obscene: “offensive to moral principles; repugnant” (New Oxford American Dictionary). Shame on LegalZoom for seizing upon Hoffman’s terrible end as a way to market its services.

LegalZoom offers no way to explain the choice to unsubscribe from its e-mails. If you call to give feedback (1-800-773-0888), you’ll be directed to a “Contact us” page. It’s possible to leave a written message there.

[And sending this e-mail on April 1: what were they thinking?]

Pelikan FullForever cartridges

New from Pelikan, FullForever ink cartridges: “Due to a special chemical process, the ink ‘regenerates’ overnight so the fountain pen is constantly ready for use. And remains so.”

My favorite pen is a Pelikan fountain pen. I start any piece of writing of any length with that pen. I can’t wait for this ink to appear in bottled form.

A related post
Five pens