Summer is now officially here. I turned in the last of my grades yesterday. Graduation was on Sunday. The campus is rather quiet today.
1. Graduation was bittersweet as always. On the one hand, it is exciting to see everyone graduate. On the other hand, a whole bunch of people with whom I have spent the last four years talking are now off to other parts of the world. Happens every year, but even still, it's an odd feeling every year.
2a. The ceremony was pretty good. Joanne gave the single best speech I have heard her give in her entire time as President. Now she is leaving. I assume there is some connection between those last two sentences, but I have not yet been able to figure out how. On the whole, she was a very good President: she raised lots of money and left me alone (which are, of course, the two most important things in a college President). Until Sunday, I thought she couldn't give a decent public speech. She never really connected with the students, so they have generally not been her biggest fans. But, overall, she was quite good for Mount Holyoke.
2b. Gail Collins was the primary speaker at graduation. Tired, old-style feminist drivel. Tired, old-style feminists seemed to like her talk. By the way, for the Collins-like people out there, why is it that a man who provides all the income for his family but does less than half of the domestic child care is a lousy husband who is not contributing his fair share to the family?
3. Graduation weekend was great, as always. This school really knows how to organize such things. Not only is it a great chance to meet the parents, but the reunions are great too. It is always nice to see all my old students again.
4. Speaking of my old students, Mallory answered my question about responding to questions on the blog. In her inimitable style, she told me that it is a simple matter of good manners to answer a question if someone asks. Desiring to be well-mannered (a noble goal to which we should all aspire in all things), I will henceforth reply to all queries on the blog.
5. One lesson learned this weekend--I really need a better answer to the question, "What books would you recommend I read?" I get asked that a lot, and I was asked that a bunch of times this weekend. I think people assume I read a lot of books. I never know what books to recommend--I don't have a list of generic book recommendations. If someone tells me what sort of book they want to read, I can usually give a suggestion or two. But, in answer to the generic question, I am always stumped. How many books is it proper to list? One, two, five, a dozen? Fiction or non-fiction? Deep, thoughtful books or quick, lively books? Classics or modern? Tragedy or Comedy? Books I recently read or books I read a long time ago? And, how often does my list of generic recommendations need to be updated? Can I just recommend P.G. Wodehouse all the time? This is seriously troubling me., I always feel like I am being a horrid conversationalist when I am asked that question and end up just standing there muttering.
6. A set of recommendations for the moment:
The perennial: P.G. Wodehouse--anything at all
Classic fiction, widely known: Dickens, Our Mutual Friend
Classic Fiction, little known: Stenger, Angle of Repose
Modern Fiction, serious: Helprin, Winter's Tale
Modern fiction, humorous: Buckley, Little Green Men
Classic non-fiction: Augustine, Confessions
Modern non-fiction, Murray, Real Education
Classic Economics: Hayek, The Constitution of Liberty
Modern Economics: Sorkin, Too Big to Fail
Classic Poetry: Byron: Collected Poems (or Don Juan if one wants a specific poem)
Modern Poetry: Juster: The Secret Language of Women
History: Gibbon, Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
Science: Faraday, The Chemical History of a Candle
Biography: Teachout, The Skeptic
Philosophy: Kierkegaard, Fear and Trembling
Religion: Chesterton, Orthodoxy
7. There is nothing particularly significant on the selection in the items in #6. If I was to make a list next week, I think only 3 of those items would still certainly be on the list.
8. I am listening to Exile on Main Street while I type this. The new version of Exile has been fascinating to read about--from what I can tell, none of the new songs are really all that interesting, yet everyone seems to be all excited about the idea of those new songs. It is reminding me of the releases from the Jimi Hendrix archives. Sure there are lots of tapes of these old guys, but, there is a reason the songs on those tapes never made it onto an album. So, if anyone has actually listened to the new Exile tracks, I'd be very interested in knowing if they are actually even remotely as good as anything on the original album.
9. Exile on Main Street is by the Rolling Stones. In case you didn't know. Often considered their best album, I am not convinced it was. I like Let it Bleed and Sticky Fingers better. But the best Stones thing ever was the Singles Collection: The London Years, having all their singles from the beginning through 1971. That is, by the way, when the Stones were really good. Exile came out in 1972. In the next 40 years--yep, 40 years--they have managed just a handfull of decent songs--and they haven't had a decent new song since 1982. Yet, they are still on tour. Go figure.
10. I recently found out that one of my new colleagues did not know who Mick Jagger is. Now that is depressing.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree -- loved Joanne's last speech. The alum opinion in the library can be summed up as follows: "Jojo's off the leash!" I should add that we also liked Gail a lot and are not tired old-style feminists -- well, maybe tired, but not old enough to be old-style, I hope. I think she's funny and charming without being gimmicky, and her columns are about the only ones I still read from the NYT. Her "slack anecdotes" reminded me of my mom, who also could not wear slacks below the second floor of her housing in nursing school. (As for the child-care splitting, I think she was referencing families in which both parents work full-time. She didn't mention stay-at-home moms in her speech, or at least I don't remember her doing so.)
ReplyDeleteThrilled to be mentioned by name (inimitable style? Really?), but even more thrilled that you'd RECOMMEND Our Mutual Friend to others. It's awesome, isn't it?
Yes, Our Mutual Friend is awesome. (For the non-Mallory readers (if there be any--does anyone actually read the comment section of a blog?) I first read OMF when Mallory wrote her senior thesis on said book.)
ReplyDeleteOn Collins--yes, she was talking only about dual earner couples--which is the point--in the Old-style feminist world, that is the only type of family worth discussing. In dual earner couples, we find the men doing less than half of the domestic child care. Thus, old-style feminists disparage men as a group for being insufficiently attentive to their household duties. Said feminists never consider the vast numbers of men throughout history who, by providing an income for their families, were doing quite a bit of the household duties.