Sunday’s Forum
Steven L. Taylor
·
Sunday, April 21, 2024
·
36 comments
About Steven L. Taylor
Steven L. Taylor is a Professor of Political Science and a College of Arts and Sciences Dean. His main areas of expertise include parties, elections, and the institutional design of democracies. His most recent book is the co-authored
A Different Democracy: American Government in a 31-Country Perspective. He earned his Ph.D. from the University of Texas and his BA from the University of California, Irvine. He has been blogging since 2003 (originally at the now defunct Poliblog).
Follow Steven on
Twitter
Another one.
Four planes cleared to cross a runway where a plane is taking off.
The Sports headline of the day- Beijing half marathon winners stripped of medals after African trio let Chinese runner win
Well, looks like the bond Lardass secured to prevent his assets from being seized while he appeals is no good.
For one thing, the issuer, an obscure insurance company in another state, does not have the cash reserves to cover it, and it’s not acting in accordance with NY state law.
Then it seems the collateral Lardass offered might be fraudulent.
I hope E. Jean Carroll’s lawyers have looked at the bond in their case.
The Florida headline of the day- Taylor Swift course being offered at UCF
@Kathy: I have to admit I was surprised that Trump or anyone but the richest of the rich would have that much in cash. If it was legit it would have forced me to revise my amateur estimate of his net worth to be above $1B, maybe nearing $2B.
I still think that when and if an attempt is made to secure and/or seize Trump’s assets, we will find out they are multiply encumbered to entities that a) don’t know about the other encumbrances an b) don’t want their involvement public due to other illegalities.
@MarkedMan: I am hoping for a run on Trump’s assets, when numerous parties realize that they have to *act now* or find themselves fighting for pennies on the dollar.
Marjorie Taylor Greene is no Neville Chamberlain.
Saw Civil War last night. Highly, highly recommend. All I’ll say is that it’s nearly 2 hours of constant tension so don’t go in thinking it’s some action hero movie.
I’d be interested in discussing it here, once others have seen it.
@Bill Jempty: She’s been a hugely impactful cultural figure for going on two decades now. I’m guessing that there are dozens of college courses around her.
@Bill Jempty:
“Taylor Swift course being offered at UCF”
Next week’s headline — Governor DeSantis slashes state funding for UCF, citing evidence of woke indoctrination.
@Moosebreath: “Next week’s headline — Governor DeSantis slashes state funding for UCF, citing evidence of woke indoctrination.”
Nah, Taylor Swift is white.
Wait until someone tries the Beyonce class…
@wr:
Beyonce does already have courses about her, at the University of Copenhagen business school and at Arizona State and Rutgers. You can also takes courses in Ye, Lana del Rey, Rihanna, and Miley Cyrus at other institutions of higher learning.
@Bill Jempty:
I, for one, completely support college courses that use Swift, or to @CSK’s point other current cultural figures to connect theory to practice. Honestly, this is exactly what MORE college courses should be doing.
@Matt Bernius:
Agree. I don’t have any interest in the music of either Taylor or Beyoncé, but these two know a few things about business. Taylor Swift can’t even dance and she’s banked a billion dollars.
The thing is though that people who’ve actually succeeded in the creative world might teach lessons at odds with the approved institutional lesson plans. I could teach a course in writing that would begin with, “This course is a waste of time, no one can teach you to write, you can either do it, or you can’t.”
You know what writers never, ever talk about amongst themselves while sitting in green rooms? Writing. We talk contracts, rights deals, agents, IP lawyers and the manipulation of editors. I was once with a couple of mildly intoxicated big deal writers and one tried to get a conversation going about Oxford commas. As a joke, obviously. No one GAF about punctuation. (As I regularly demonstrate here.). Virtually everything we say to the public is a lie, starting with every answer to the inevitable, “Where do you get your ideas?”
@Michael Reynolds:
Years ago I was driving back from an appearance from an appearance with another writer, and I asked, exasperatedly, “Why do they always want to know if we use computers?” Jerry smiled and replied, “Because it makes it seem less like magic to them.”
As for the question “where do you get your ideas,” my normal response is “I think them up.”
@CSK:
Hah! I remember back at the dawn of time when computers were new getting the ‘what software do you use?’ question a lot. I use MyBrain 1.0.
@Matt Bernius:
(I need a non sarcasm tag here) Can you elaborate on this? What type of theory and what type of practice?
@MarkedMan:
Sure, in the course in question they are apparently looking at classic and modern rhetorical theory.
From the link:
There is a wealth of communications, social science, and media theory that can be used in this type of analysis. Beyond straight rhetoric, you can look at things semiotically, or historically contextualize it by looking at other studies of celebrity from over the years. That’s before you get to things like using someone like Swift as a way to unpack cultural ideas like parasocial relationships.
While I expect some are rolling their eyes at the above, the ability to use these analytical tools is actually really valuable in various business domains like communications, marketing, and advertising. I know quite a few former academics who have done very well for themselves working in those areas.
@Michael Reynolds:
I’m not surprised that you would articulate this view. It does seem at odds with the many university based writing programs. To take the obvious example, the Iowa program is loaded with accomplished faculty.
I grapple a lot with your point about “you can either do it, or you can’t.” A big part of my job is to teach scientific writing. Not in a formal course, but rather as a director of a large lab producing a lot of output. And also as a collaborator/mentor outside of my sandbox.
I suspect that, because scientific writing is more script-governed than is creative writing, it lends itself more to teaching. I try to set my expectations to “competency” but I’m rather fussy, so I’m constantly battling against my own (highly refined and superior, natch) taste preferences.
Some trainees “get it” right away. Or arrive having already gotten it. These folks are fun to work with because most of our focus is on the science, less so on the communicating clearly.
Other trainees “get it”… eventually and often at a lower level of sophistication, but competent nonetheless.
Still others (an increasing proportion, it seems to me) don’t ever quite “get it”… at least not over the many years we work closely together. These folks are painful to mentor because so much of it involves “not science.” And it’s difficult, seemingly impossible, for remediation to make much headway at this point. One is battling competing time demands, brain plasticity constraints, and frustration (in)tolerance, amongst other things.
@CSK:
That’s a cheeky retort. My follow-up question would be: “And where do you get your thoughts?”
@Mimai:
From the First National Bank of Thoughts. Where else?
@Michael Reynolds: “The thing is though that people who’ve actually succeeded in the creative world might teach lessons at odds with the approved institutional lesson plans. ”
With all due respect, Michael, there are plenty of us who actually have succeeded in the creative world who devote themselves to helping the next generation to learn how to do it.
The world of writing instruction — yes, even the world of the MFA — is not just a swamp of hacks who study theory and try to pass that on to gullible youths.
I acknowledge and respect the fact that as a writer you are entirely self-taught. And God knows you’re not alone — there are many successful writers who have never taken a class.
And it’s also true that there are some elements of writing that can’t be taught. But the fact is, writing is both an art and a craft, and the craft can be taught. People can learn how to understand and reach the heart of a story, or to channel their own thoughts and visions in ways that are compelling to other people. People can learn to become much better writers. Some of them would certainly get there on their own someday, and we’re just helping to accelerate the process. Some are in need of being guided to a breakthrough that will allow them to realize their creative ambitions.
It’s funny, I don’t hear a lot of composers saying that music can’t be taught, you either have it or you don’t. Or painters claiming that they never studied art. Or chefs insisting that culinary schools only exist to fleece the rubes, while all the great chefs are entirely self-created.
To me, the idea that writing can’t be taught is the flip side of the notion that anyone can write a great novel or screenplay simply because they know the alphabet.
@CSK: “As for the question “where do you get your ideas,” my normal response is “I think them up.””
That is the one question that immediately separates writer from non-writer. Because any writer knows that you get your ideas from everywhere — and that the idea is the least important part of the process. It’s not having the idea, it’s realizing that you have it and that it’s worth exploring… and it’s having the ability to take that idea and grow it into a story.
Everybody’s got ideas — even the ones who are asking the questions.
@CSK:
Sounds like a SBF adjacent bank that’s all-in on crypto. Which is not to be taken as an indictment of your thoughts 😉
@Michael Reynolds:
It’s cool that the moment you popped out of the womb, you were able to write. And before you learned to read or hold a pen! Truly impressive.
Yet, successful writers do write books about writing. I am pretty sure that you recently stated that you had read Elmore Leonard’s book. If nothing can be taught, why would you waste your time?
Do individuals have limits? Sure. Do individuals display differential ease of development between subjects? Sure. Do we know how and why? Eh, not a complete understanding–and the aspects thought to be understood are subject to significant revision, perhaps disposal, after further study.
The value of that class is likely dependent upon the skillset of the instructor. There is nothing wrong with that. You may not be suited to teaching what you do. But that does not mean no one can teach writing effectively.
@wr:
If you take the question seriously, and try to answer it seriously, you have to say “lots of different places, I suppose.” The truth is, I don’t give much thought to where my ideas come from. I can’t force it.
I have taught, or overseen might be a better word, numerous writing classes. The best help I can ive students come in the form of editorial suggestions.
@wr:
Oh, I believe you can teach a person to write better, but you can’t teach them to have an original idea. (I was actually going to make that very point, but my wife wanted eggs.)
A vacant lot, a Wendy’s bag, three AAA batteries and a single ballet slipper. I can make a story about that. You can make a story about that. I don’t believe you can teach a person how to make a story about that. They got it, or they don’t. I think the people you’re teaching already have the feel for language, the sense of rhythm, the imagination. And TBH I’m not ‘self-taught,’ I just started one day.
A while ago my sister sent me some school essay I’d written when I was six, I think. I’m a better writer than I was then (well. . .) but had I seen it without attribution, I’d have known I wrote it. It’s in my voice, which is another thing I don’t believe you can teach.
As for the music analogy, try teaching me to play drums. Cannot be done. I am unable to keep a beat. (Really.) But you can’t even teach me to write poetry because that’s not how language works for me. It’s something my wife can do, but I can’t. But I can plot circles around her, because that is how language works for me.
So yeah, teach the rules, teach the form, teach people to write more clearly, absolutely. But Paddy Chayefsky or Mike Schur aren’t who they are (or were) because they were well-taught. They were able to put learning to work because of who they are. (Or were.)
@CSK:
Interesting. I give quite a lot of thought to where my ideas come from. Which isn’t to say that I force it. Rather, I take seriously the notion that one’s thoughts are downstream from what one consumes.
As such, I intentionally read science that is adjacent to (often) and well afar from (less often) from my own sphere. Similarly for non-science disciplines, though that is as much for pleasure as it is for “work.”
If you’ll forgive the boast, I’m known for doing innovative work that pulls from a lot of different disciplines, methods, etc. Part of that is baked into my cake, for sure. I’m also certain that a big(ger) part is the result of intentionally managing my consumption.
I wonder if creative writing is different, in general. Or creative writers are. Or maybe it’s all just individual differences.
@Matt Bernius: As an actual pointy-headed academic (as well as an ignint cracker), I see headlines like that and am torn. On one hand, I sigh and think “what’s this world coming to.” On the other, I think “that sounds interesting, yeah, I’d take that.”
I think the dissonance comes from the system tending to avoid studying contemporaries. Possibly out of fear of picking the wrong one and looking silly.
@wr: Reynolds and I had this conversation years ago while I was in Korea. To the degree that I recall, he eventually retreated to the high ground that he was talking about the creative process (as in “the art”) and that what I did teaching writing had no relationship to what he was talking about.
Even so, I’m still inclined to believe that I could teach even people who are totally focused on the creative process part by doing the same task that I performed for students taking my extremely script driven and scaffolded process–questioning what I don’t understand and/or believe about what I’m reading/they’ve written. But I’m just arrogant that way. (And not “an author,” so I realize my opinions don’t count–but I’ve been told that before, too.)
@Matt Bernius: Thanks. That was helpful
@Michael Reynolds: “I think the people you’re teaching already have the feel for language, the sense of rhythm, the imagination. ”
Oh, yeah. We only admit the ones where we can see the spark.
This is someplace where our opinions are probably closer than our words…
@Michael Reynolds:
@Mimai:
@CSK:
As Cracker can attest, I get my ideas from a service in Schenectady, New York.
*The price has gone up significantly since Barry Longyear first wrote about it. I now have to mail two quarters in the envelope (& include a SASE) in order to get a response.
@Flat Earth Luddite:
Ideas R Us?
@CSK:
PO Box ….
ETA
ideas r us unfortunately fell prey to the crypto run of 2021 and filed banko
@Flat Earth Luddite: Are you sure the service isn’t in Synecdoche?
@just nutha:
Bwa haha hahahaha hahahahahaha…
That’s a different service. They sell ideas to political consultants