unravelling at night what she had woven during the day, as a clever ploy to “buy time” and stave off hungry suitors - Odyssey

Top Image

Top Image

Archives and bluegrass

From: Institutional Archivist 
Subject: Re: Submit a Research Question - September 20, 2014 18:45:42
Date: 9 Novemeber, 2014 4:29:40 PM EST
To: researcher


Yes this is my kind of weather.  There is an old, old bluegrass song about the cold December rain in Virginia and lost love -- the song is titled Blue Virginia Blues. No everyone's classic song perhaps, but our cold December rain even penetrates and chills old mountain songs.

I am very glad that you found the file you were seeking.  I was preparing to say that I was sure nothing had been removed, and to suggest it must have arrived that way...you see, I cannot always vouch for those accessions that begin with the 2008 prefix -- that January I was overseeing the move of the Institutional Archives from my old space at L'Enfant Plaza, and the safety catches on the ladder I was standing on failed.  Well, the ladder rolled from beneath me and I fell and broke my knee.  When I returned full time to work that June I was wearing a robocop leg brace and using a cane -- and 39 pallets of boxes stacked to the rafters were waiting for me.  Anyway, my usual triage for providing basic management of all those boxes was more like battlefield first aid, and someday I need to improve control and access to all of that material.

On a related note, it occurred to me that you may enjoy seeing our offsite-facility.  Just let me know if so, and we can arrange a visit.

Regarding Edna's files for the Memory to Action exhibit, I wrote her and asked if she is ready and willing to part with any of that material.  Hopefully she will be willing.  One thing too that comes to mind is that I believe Bridget Conley-Zilkic may have also worked on that project.  Bridget worked for the Committee on Conscience, so I plan to check her files more closely tomorrow when I go to our off-site building.

As for the questions in the mail you sent yesterday -- they are deep, but I will also see what I can do to find answers.

Well, have a nice evening, and try to stay dry.

Institutional archivist 


Opening Statement:

During these first few minutes allotted to my opening statement I would like to touch on two themes: the first will address why I initially chose Nietzsche as the topic of my thesis and how my understanding of Nietzsche’s conception of life, and his philosophy as a whole, changed over the course of preparing this thesis.  Secondly, once this has been completed, I will then close with a reflection on the nature of my thesis, and the ramifications this discussion has for this thesis defense itself.

Over the course of researching and writing this thesis, and the amount of time it has allowed me to immerse myself in Nietzsche’s texts, my outright admiration has undergone a transformation. This new perspective of viewing Nietzsche has had an important ramification for my understanding of Nietzsche’s philosophy as a whole, and in particular with his conception of ‘life’.  For while I had previously understood Nietzsche’s approach to life as being about truly understanding something of philosophy, value theory, and morality which had previously been unaddressed, I am now of the opinion that his philosophy was intended to be primarily a self-medication; a manner by which and through which he hoped to bring some sort of meaning into his own life.  This is certainly not an utterly original thought in itself, as it has been previously raised by a number of Nietzsche commentators: Hollingdale, Kauffmann, and Lietzer, to name a few.  Indeed, Nietzsche himself seems to make this same point: “philosophy,” he tells us in The Gay Science, “cannot teach us anything about the world, but, rather, will teach us only about the philosopher who wrote it.”  A philosophy, therefore, which seeks to its very end a manner to affirm life seems to speak to a philosopher who himself found life intolerable.  

This is perhaps the most important insight I have attained from the composition of this thesis, for it allowed me to see not just Nietzsche, but all philosophers in a different light.  As students we are constantly exposed to the great minds of philosophy whose books appear as self-help guides for all us ‘lesser’ minds to help us come to understand the world and satiate our desire to learn and understand.  Yet it is helpful to remember, as my inquiry into Nietzsche has revealed, that philosophers are as much students, and as much driven by their desire to learn and understand, as are we students ‘proper’.  Dionysus, it seems, has united us once again.

Philosophy was to be the new love of my life.  Yet what has stuck me the longest from this first introduction to philosophy was a comment made by my professor when he was discussing our final term paper.  To paraphrase he suggested that “in philosophy papers are never really finished.  Philosophy is about thought, arguments, and opinions, and these change over time in direct relation to our exposure to new ideas, and the time we are allotted to reflect on them.  In one sense a paper is ‘finished’ in that there are time lines, due dates, etc. which necessitate that one have something completed and finished to show for.  Yet even after a paper is written, edited, and handed in, the opinion of the author writing the paper will continue to change long after the paper is submitted.”
This is an idea which has stuck with me over the now 6 years of my philosophy degree, and it is one which I have been struggling with particularly over the past 4 months since the submission of my thesis.  For there was a time line.  There was a due date.  And something was required to be printed off and handed in.  Yet my reflection on Nietzsche’s account of life, and my thesis in general, did not stop at that point.  The brain, quite annoyingly, does not come with an off switch.  I found myself wanting to add a sentence here, or paragraph there, to either refine an argument, add in a new idea which occurred to me, or correct a possible misconception regarding my phrasing of a particular point.

This desire was only compounded, however, over the months I received the reports from my committee.  The comments and criticisms outlined in these reports, in addition to providing me with many nervous, sleepless nights, also provided me an opportunity to reflect even further on a number of the arguments I had made forcing me to re-think and re-approach a number of the themes discussed in my thesis.

I mention all this because I find myself now in the awkward position of being at a thesis defense for a thesis which I do not, in every aspect, and every detail, feel can be defended.  As a result, in preparing for this defense I have been forced, in addition to reflecting on my thesis proper, to also reflect on the nature of a thesis defense itself.  What is a thesis defense?  What is it that I am defending?  And perhaps most importantly, is it possible to have changed one’s mind regarding particular aspects of a thesis, while still defending the thesis itself.

It was during this reflection that I came to remember what my first philosophy professors had mentioned regarding the never-fully-finished nature of a paper.  It occurred to me that what is most essential to a thesis is not the concrete finished product that is submitted, but the question or problem the thesis was aimed at answering, and the manner by which that thesis sought to achieve it.  A thesis is defined by its problem, and proceeds through its methodology.  The answer to this problem will invariably be a product of the experiences we have had, the opinions we have been exposed to, and the ability of our minds to dialogue the two, and move forward.  It seems, therefore, that any insight, comment, addition, or modification which further clarifies the thesis’ answer to the problem cannot be regarded as damaging to the thesis itself.  Rather, these are precisely the types of transformations which do, and indeed must, accompany all thought.

It is on this point which I would like to close.  For although some of the comments highlighted by Professors L and S were potent to some of my arguments, I do not believe any of them are fatal to the general purpose, method, or conclusions of this thesis itself.  As such, I believe this thesis as a whole is still a project which is capable of defense, and it is to this defense which I am now happy to engage.

Thank you.


putting into practice Paulo Freire's theories on education

I'm feeling a lot of anger as I read about the University of X's success in their latest plan to try and ruin former professor DR. This time winning a lawsuit that will force him to pay $350,000 in damages. It appears that the judge (an alumni and donor to the UofX), Prof. J (someone I used to look up to), and especially the whole UofX administration (who Darth Vader used to look up to) have carried out a disgusting attack on someone who I have learned a great deal from.

To be clear. I think DR' use of the term 'house negro' to describe Prof. J' behavior was also disgusting. DR' defence is that it's true, that J' actions in defending the University from accusations of systemic racism fit the definition of a house negro. I don't know enough to weigh in on that, for me the general rule here is that you shouldn't use insults that could never, no matter how you behave, be applied to you. So for white dudes like DR and I that means no insults based on gender, race, etc... (unless you wanna pull out the 'cracker' or 'honky'...but they don't exactly have much bite). And yes, your mama jokes are still permitted according to this rule. DR and I have talked about this at length. What we agree on is that the $1 million lawsuit was clearly not about any 'damages' resulting from his blog post, but rather an attempt to silence and destroy a critic of the University. The UofX paid for all of J' legal costs, including the hiring of the lawyer of the newspaper covering the trial.

DR is for me one of the best examples I've ever seen of what a professor and a university COULD be like. I never paid tuition at the UofX. DR might not even know that because he allowed anyone to attend his classes whether they were registered or not. Also, because of DR (and others) I watched awesome political documentaries at Cinema Politica every Friday, always followed by debates and, most importantly, organizing. That was until the UofX succeeded in shutting it down. This is also where I met a dear person, whose friendship and camaraderie has been one of the most constantly awesome factors in my life ever since. The first camera that her and I ever used was DR'. He had a few that he lent out to activists and indy journalists whenever they needed it. The first time I ever used video-editing software was on a computer in DR’ lab that he let me use when I needed it. If there was ever a way he could help us in our efforts to raise awareness around the issues we were working on (Indigenous solidarity work, anti-war, anti Israeli apartheid, etc..) he would do it. In return he reserved the right to challenge us intellectually, to get to the root. If he doesn't think your thinking has made it to the root yet, he's gonna let you know. I didn't always agree with him, but I was always stronger for having been forced to explain why I disagreed.

I still get shivers when I think about how excited I was when I experienced DR' attempts at putting into practice of Paulo Freire's theories on education, I learned more than I have in any other institutional setting. That said, I'm sure that others have had the opposite experience. It's not for everyone, nothing is. But wouldn't it be beautiful if universities offered a variety of different kinds of teachers and teaching techniques so that all students could find the one that works best for them?? That was the idea behind “academic freedom”. To allow profs and students to experiment. When DR was fired for refusing to grade his students, despite having tenure and a ruling that academic freedom defends his right to experiment with different kinds of evaluation, it was clear where the UofX stood on the dream of a diversity of teaching methods.

A quick look through the archives at his UofX Watch blog and you'll see that DR believes that it is by provoking institutions you get to see what they're really like on the inside. Being a witness to the UofX's multi-year campaign to silence, fire, and bankrupt DR has been a key part of my own education. It played a big role in my decision to turn down law school and instead go learn Spanish in El Salvador (at a Freirian school of course). Which I consider probably the single greatest decision I've ever made (up there with not buying a Bargnani jersey). While I was in E.S., DR came down for two weeks to tour the communities of the North collecting video testimony of how they were successfully stopping Canadian gold companies from forcing their mines into the region. One of the ways was through music. I've spent a bit of time with DR and I've never heard him listen to music. That said. A few months after the trip I told DR that H was trying to raise $500 to press an album. Within the hour the cash was waiting for H at the Western Union in Sensuntepeque.

DR has said and done things that have pissed people off. I have heard people that I love and respect tell me why they can't support him because of x or y that he did. I respect that decision. I am not defending any of DR’ actions. He's more than capable of doing that himself. I'm pointing out a small % of the many positive things I've seen him do over the 7 years that I've known him. Unfortunately, most of the amazing things he's done are VERY rare among professors. And so the first reason I write this is in hopes that sharing a bit of this bright side of DR' complex story could inspire universities and the people inside them to flip the script and embrace another vision of how these institutions could work (start by reading and experimenting with Freire). The second reason is to continue to pass on some of the lessons DR' story continues to provide us about the vile way these institutions are currently working.

I will continue pressuring DR to put all this into a book entitled “The Fuckers: A Story About the University of X” so that I don't have to write to get these stories out, I can just write “Get The Fuckers!” and be done with it.


yours is not a serious study

From: LDN mate
Date: 24 May, 2014 10:21:00 AM EDT
To: transportation ignorant 

so try this on for size

i have a project, approved by a committee after many months of hard work and countless revisions

after 20 interviews and hours of documentary and archival research i spent the last 15 days making the most beautiful presentation ever seen by man to share some of my preliminary conclusions

i went yesterday to do a dry run of it and received the following feedback:

"yours is not a serious study"

"you have no real contribution"

"you will be wasting the time of the important people who are coming to this presentation"

arguments and tactics

From: a friend I need to tell i appreciate more often
Date: 15 March, 2014 
To: a friend in need

Those all sound like good reasons to break up with someone.  I have to admit I was concerned the other week when you described him as perhaps a reformed woman hater.  as much as I like to think that as people have new experiences they grow and their personalities develop and they realize previous opinions they held were wrong - there is a large male population that outwardly expresses socially progressive views because they have been brow beaten into submission - but that's not a real reformation of spirit.  and when they feel challenged - whether because a woman got a job they didn't or a woman is writing her PhD and exploring ideas they didn't - they get defensive and resort to belittling.

I dated a guy who was certainly not an overt misogynist and I think would self-describe as progressive and supportive of women. but whenever we tried to have a thoughtful conversation about politics he would draw from his own stable of facts and hammer those facts in counter to my more theoretical musings to make his point and "win" the discussion.  that's definitely one way to win a debate and at the time (I was quite a bit younger than him) I thought he must be very smart and well-read to know all these facts but over time I realized that that's exactly all he had, this stable of tired facts that he would trot out. and they are impressive but if he was just listening to what I was actually saying he would have realized that there were connections between his facts and my broader, perhaps less developed or concise, musings.  a better man (or woman) would have encouraged dialogue and discussion to highlight the ways in which we were talking about the same thing AND the ways we weren't and then we could have both developed as opposed to him deciding that he had sufficient facts for life and should just defend and protect those existing facts and me feeling like my ideas weren't valid because there was something out there that challenged them.

I didn't really think that much about this tactic at the time. the relationship ran its course and ended.  but as I got older I started to realize this is a common tactic among some people - to use a few comfortable facts to hammer their opponent.  it's not specifically anti-female but it just seems that more men have been groomed to use this tactic and when someone does not - like asking a question or wondering about the strength of an idea, they subconsciously see it as weakness and an opportunity to be Right and use their helpful facts.  it's really fucking annoying.  I don't think it comes from a bad place necessarily but it definitely kills a conversation and wastes a lot of potential mutual growth.  I mean you could emerge from a conversation still thinking your original POV is right for you, but wouldn't hearing the other possibilities be good?

im not saying my boyfriend is perfect - not by a long shot - he's often sullen when he's stressed (as you saw) and his obsession with knowing the Right Answer often causes him to nitpick points that are really ancillary to the arc of an idea but at least I feel he respects my intelligence. 

for someone like you - someone for whom learning is so important - you should be with someone that you can comfortably share that with.  obviously no one is perfect and everyone you meet will be flawed but you need to be with someone who has the same values as you. 

I would say, if the sex is good and you're having fun then just continue to have fun even if you realize long term there's not enough there to sustain a relationship - so long as it doesn't prevent you from seeking other, more positive relationships, but it sounds like it isn't fun any more and I know this is an important year for you school wise so maybe ending it is the right call.  you know yourself best and if your instinct was to end it now then I think it's good you listened.  too many people stay in limp relationships because they fear being single or optimistically keep giving their partner extra chances when really everyone should just go their own way.

sigh.  im at work. I suspect you are working too.

- important friend

stay in space

From: west coast friend
Date: 14 Aug, 2013 
To: north shore friend


While I am getting better at realizing how I contribute to a world that seems to have different values than my own, I remind myself to stay committed to wading through the uncertainties of what and where this may bring me.

I wanted to share some advice I got a while ago that helps me carry on: Even if you feel like you aren't moving, you are. Standing in the space of academia (or any space) changes you, and in turn, you also change it and the people within it.

I hope you are well and would love to keep chatting with you about this (and/or anything else!).



From: childhood friend
Subject: Re: city!
Date: 30 March, 2014 2:08:49 AM EDT
To: friend


Thanks for your kind text messages. Sorry but I'm not a big texter, got wayyy too much to say and wayyyy too little patience for that shit.

I found it incredible, much like yourself, that all the positive traits I had remembered about you were not fabrications of a memory gone wild, but ever-present. In fact, it is inspiring to me that the none of the coercive institutions that are undergraduate education, graduate education, the Catholic Church and widescreen television have succeeded in breaking down your free spirit. And I have no doubt that nothing ever will. I would tell you that I wish you nothing but the best, but I think its more important that I tell you that I have no doubts you will get the best.

Here's a quote a friend of mine got me on to a while ago. Substituting for the use of the male pronoun, I'm interested to know if you think it applies to you, if it jives with your experience.

 "I think there's an idea that people have that life is a linear progression, where you go from A to B to C and so on, and if you don't get to B you won't get to C. In fact it's a total illusion, because anyone who thinks carefully about his own life knows that the pattern of his past is absolutely accidental and serendipitous. The key challenge in life is not to know where you are going to go but prepare your character so when those wonderful moments of serendipity occur, you can listen to your heart and know what it is you need to do." - Wade Davis

Anyways, I can't wait to see you again soon.

Much love. 


From: Guy
Subject: I'll add a book every time we have sex
Date: 2 February, 2014 9:23:02 AM EST
To: Her

I have a gift for you. It's a reading list I made of books that are important to me that you may enjoy.


--  “The Possibility of Naturalism” by Roy Bhaskar; or for an easier first read “Realism and Social Science” by Andrew Sayer (Bhaskar is the founder of the critical realist school of the philosophy of science which lays the grounds for breaking down the demarcation between how we study the natural and the social in terms of science. It is inherently a radical and, in many ways, a revolutionary position that critiques positivism as much as postmodernism). (Sayer, following in the critical realist school, writes in a more accessible manner, but makes a particularly interesting extension in this work by critically examining the fetishization of space....super interesting when read in combination of David Harvey)

-- Really anything by David Harvey... ‘’A Brief History of Neoliberalism’’ is neat but so is his work ‘‘Limits to Capital’’

--  “Change the World without Taking Power” by John Holloway (autonomous Marxists that runs very counter to orthodox Marxists readings of revolution and of how workers and people build conscious)

--  “Political Activist as Ethnographer’’ by George Smith. This is a great piece on the strategies and challenges faced by AIDS activists in Toronto fought against bathhouse raids and the police, as well as public opinion during the early 1980s. This is a journal article.

-- “The Strate bjkgy of Refusal” by Sergio Bolgna  (I’m questioning both the title of the article and the spelling of the last name). But this is one of the main pieces that came from the early 1970s workers movement in Italy that focused on eliminating forms of power and control over others in the workplace.

--  “Rules for Radicals’’ by Saul Alinski ...super neat book about ways of organizing people, and what to watch for from the state.

--  “Steal this book” by Abbie Hoffman. Written in the 1970s, it’s pretty much a handbook for how to rip off the capitalist system. How to steal food, squat land, etc. 

-- “Direct Action: An Ethnography” by David Graeber. Amazing account of all the organizing events around the ‘Battle of Seattle’ and the Summit of Quebec. Such a rich detailed account that shows just how much effort and diversity exists within protest movements.

-- “Diversity of Tactics’’ by Chris Hurl in Upping the Anti. I don’t fully agree with his position, but I think it offers a good overview into some of the discussions that occur within activists circles.

1) personal reasons 2) professional reasons 3) both 4) neither

From: Future PhD student
Subject: What do you think of your program
Date: 8 January, 2014 
To: Current PhD Candidate 


My name is Future Student and I TA with your friend at Orange University.  I am just in the midst of preparing PhD applications and am considering Critical Science department at Blue University.  I guess I'm just looking for an inside opinion on how you are enjoying the experience and how you find the workload.  My partner is a PhD student at Orange U and I have kids, so if accepted, I will likely be commuting from the South (although my folks live in Blue Town, so I have place to crash).

My own research interests have grown both out of my MA research on the production of Cool Things in the age of VBN and my professional background in that industry.  I hope to investigate how recent amendments to That Act have obfuscated our understanding of what it means to do Cool Things. 

I've been in contact with The Director who has suggested my research may overlap with the following professors:  Ms. Her, Ms. Hen, Sir. Him.  Have you had any contact with them and have you found them to be good to work with?  Is there anyone else you think of that I should contact?

Thanks for taking the time, and I look forward to hearing from you.

Future PhD student

From: Future PhD student
Subject: re: What do you think of your program
Date: 19 January, 2014
To: Current PhD Candidate 


My goodness, sorry for the delayed response!  

Yes, good questions. I will start with a caveat: I have not figured out yet if I am doing this PhD for 1) personal reasons, 2) professional reasons, 3) both, or 4) neither. I thought I wanted to teach when I started but the job market is pretty terrible. For that reason, I have reformulated the reasons why I am doing what I am doing while in the thick of PhD studies. I think I am doing this for personal reasons - maybe I am trying to find myself esteem and confidence through school.  But at the same time PhD work breaks down confidence, promotes insecurity and I often feel like I'm about to have a nervous breakdown. It took me three years to realize this and its pretty depressing. Giving up would make it worse. Staying here is painful. I am sure your wife has told you about how isolation and poverty, constant criticism and competition, all amounting to no tangible guarantee of employment, can really turn someone inside out.  So maybe I am not doing it for personal reasons. If it is neither, than I imagine it is my pride and ego encouraging me along (you must have an ego to do a PhD, I am sure you know this). Perhaps it is because I love my project and I am sincerely interested in my topic. Maybe the answer to why I am doing what I am doing will only appear once I've completed the program. Maybe not. Here's hoping. 

The program: amazing! The faculty here are pretty critical and supportive. I am proud of that. 

The course work was demanding, but natural: we all know how to write papers and put readings in conversation for the sake of fruitful seminar discussion. How much Quine or  Pierce have you read?:)

There are 15 people accepted a year, and there are 6 cohorts at the moment. Because the program is still relatively new the department seems to be pretty flexible and open - the students and faculty, together, are constructing the boundaries of the program. I see this as a healthy and exciting circumstance to challenge a PhD, while others, I'm afraid, pine for more structure. I suppose its a matter of preference.

Your research: for certain this department has faculty that do policy analysis. However, most of those professors are not lecturing any of the PhD courses (maybe Ms. Her). Of course, the faculty rotates and I have no clue who will be teaching those courses next year. But as it stand now, those who guide us PhDers through our coursework are more theoretically oriented. I am not sure at what angle you would like to explore the object of research you propose...... at any rate, it sounds interesting! 

I do not know Ms. Hen or Sir. Him, unfortunately. Ms. Her I know and like. She's a firecracker and an exciting and eccentric person. I was in her class for a hot minute but decided to switch out for another course which suited me better. If you are looking to do applied ethics act , those professors are sound recommendations. I would also contact SeƱor Brick. He's an excellent scholar, very causal and bright. He writes on Cool Things.  Perhaps send him an e-mail?

I hope this honesty didn't unsettle you! Know that I am happy to be at this university, in this department, doing a project I love profoundly. 

All the best and let me know if you have any questions!

PhD Candidate

Yes, No , Maybe, So...

From: Grad Program Person
Subject: Award
Date: 06 January, 2014 2:41 PM EST
To: Grad Student

Hello Grad student,

I wanted to update you on The Big Award you applied for recently. Unfortunately, we were only able to put forward one name and you were not nominated for this award.


Your Grad Program Person

From: Grad Program Person
Subject: Award Error
Date:  10 January, 2014 12:15 PM EST
To: Grad Student

Grad student,

I am sorry that I mixed up The Big Award letters. The department forwarded your application to the Faculty of Grad Studies but they did not forward it to The Big Award Council. I was just filing and noticed this contradiction in letters.

Sorry about the letters.

Your Grad Program Person

From: Grad Student
Subject: Re: Award Error
Date:  13 January, 2014 9:39 AM EST
To: Grad Program Person

Hi Grad Program Person,

The letter that I got said I wasn't forwarded.

Grad student

From: Grad Program Person
Subject: Award Error
Date:  13 January, 2014 2:09 PM EST
To: Grad Student

Hello, I am sorry I have further complicated this whole issue. Please disregard this letter.

Grad Program Person

bureaucratic ferris wheel

From: Admin Assistant, Student Affairs
Date: Nov 25, 2013
To: Student
Subject: Meeting Notice 

Hello Student,

The Office of Student Affairs has received a report from the Athletics Department regarding the unauthorized distribution and use of your student card. Specifically, you lent your student card to a friend so that they could access the facility. Accordingly, Athletics confiscated your card.

In accordance with the Student Rights and Responsibilities Policy, you have allegedly violated: 

Category 1, Section 7, Failure to Comply (with the terms and conditions of Cold University Identification)

This is to advise you that you are required to meet with the Director of Student Affairs. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss the conduct alleged and to determine whether such conduct merits the imposition of a sanction.

Your meeting is scheduled for December 5, 2013 at 10:00 am in 430 Who Knows Building.  Please confirm your attendance via email to me no later than December 2nd. Note that failure to respond to this request and attend this mandatory meeting will result in a fine for non-compliance that will be applied to your student account. In addition, the Director will render a decision regarding this incident based on available evidence. This decision will be communicated to you via email.

Also, you may wish to speak with the University Ombudsman in advance of this meeting. The Ombudsman role is to advise and support students throughout the Student Rights and Responsibilities process.

Thank you.

Administrative Assistant, Student Affairs

From: Student
Sent: November 25, 2013
To: Admin Assistant, Student Affairs
Subject: RE: Meeting Notice


Your email came as a surprise to me and quite an unpleasant one at that. I feel that not only my time had been wasted reading this but every person involved in this bureaucratic chain up to the point of me receiving this absurd message. 

The amount of actual crime or 'violations' as you'd call it that occur on the daily by either the student body or staff of the University that go unreported or bypass investigation is insulting. This pathetic type of work ethic is increased by the actions leading up to and after the send button was clicked from your email. 

I will attend your meeting and play your pithy game as to not give you anymore of the money you so hungrily take from everyone who attends, parks, and is involved in the University community. 

As a side note, if school violence was ever a concern to you, I'd rearrange the way you deal with your issues. I could see that a person with less patience, confidence, or mental stability than I do, who would have to deal with such a trivial matter on top of everything else in their life would be inclined to take their anger out on the people responsible for their meltdown. 

I will simply shake and hang my head in embarrassment for you and everyone in this chain. 

My email here is to acknowledge that I have read your concerns and have given a second to 30 of thought towards your pathetic threats of fining me. 

I don't have time to be interviewed by your summer interns about this and the resource you'd otherwise spend to pay these people can be placed elsewhere, possibly towards fixing the automatic doors that ostensibly assist people with disabilities who also help pay your salary with no benefit. 


From: Director of Student Affairs
Sent: November 25, 2013
To: Student
Subject: Meeting - Notice


I’ll be working with you directly to set up a meeting for us to chat.  The Administrative Assistant has shared your emails with me.  I’m looking forward to the opportunity to discuss the concerns you have with the university and this situation in particular.  While lending out your card to another student (allegedly) is not the end of the world, the university does have a process and it needs to be followed.  You do have an option.  Rather than meeting with me, you can simply go to Info University and have a new card printed.  If you choose this route, I’ll assign the obligatory fine of $25 along with an email asking you not duplicate the behaviour.  However, I do think we could both benefit from discussing the issue that brought you to my attention as well as the concerns you’ve shared with my assistant in writing subsequently.

I’ll leave it to you to determine how you would like to proceed.

Kind regards,

Director of Student Affairs

From: Student

Sent: November 27, 2013
To: Director of Student Affairs
Subject: Meeting

With deepest, sadness I'm writing to inform you that I will not be able to ride the bureaucratic ferris wheel with you. I will be away until the 10th, in which case you can reschedule a meeting if this issue is still relevant. 


PhD correspondence All rights reserved © Blog Milk Powered by Blogger