The picture on the left is unsourced. I photoshopped the original to make the three individuals look even more inane than they appear in the source photograph. I have made them look more inane so that they can more credibly represent three types of academic which now infest universities. The three types are all on the make, they all "power-dress" in corporate clothing, and they all bear little or no relationship to academics from the fondly remembered past.
The three types are: (a) spivs; (b) lurk merchants; and (c) urgers.
Spivs are sharp-dressers, talk up a storm in meetings (without really saying anything of substance), flatter superiors, and relentlessly network (rather than generate or disseminate knowledge). They laugh a lot (usually loudly) but don't have a sense of humour.
Lurk merchants spy out the landscape - with an eye particularly to identifying any bandwagons which are likely to trundle by. They are essentially amoral careerists, who always "research" the hot topics (that is, fashionable topics), and make sure they come up with results acceptable to colleagues and funding bodies. Lurk merchants look after each other, but only on a "what's in it for me" basis.
Urgers are cultish enthusiasts for a particular world-view. They are control-freaks who wish to have their own views on their pet topics prevail. In the remote past, they used to form small communities in the wilderness and store imperishable foodstuffs against an imminent invasion by flying saucers... or perhaps amass weaponry to defend themselves against freemasons and telephone companies. Nowadays they have a home in academe - as postmodernists, poststrucuralists, semioticians etc. They express their aggression by conducting witch-hunts against skeptical colleagues and rational students.
I will elaborate on these three types, and give examples in later posts.
5 comments:
Jeez, it sounds like capitalist style academics to me. scary thought.
That's really what it's like out there, huh?
You're not just kidding?
Just a quick suggestion Jef, perhaps one should refer to these creatures as something other than 'academics' in order to distinguish them from academics in general?
I suggest ‘academiniques’, ‘academiks’, or ‘akademiks’ for starters.
Or perhaps from a taxonomic perspective:
'Faux academicus' with the following subspecies:
'F. academicus spivi'
'F. academicus lurkus'
'F. academicus urguri'
Or more correctly (after consulting my Latin dictionary):
"Perfidus academicus"
Thanks to L>T and Ben for the food for thought. I just love blogging! As a result of your comments I will tweak my concepts a little. I think bagging academics in general is a little too broad-brush. The three types are really found in abundance in the social sciences and humanities. But even there, many academics are genuine seekers after truth (and therefore my criticisms don't apply to them). While Ben's suggestions for nomenclature are attractive, I have opted for my own coinages. Henceforth spivs, lurk merchants and urgers working in academe shall be known as spivademics, lurkademics and urgerdemics (respectively). My next post will explore the concept of spivademics in more detail.
Incidentally Ben, I loved your concept of Macco's Razor in your comments on an earlier post.
Post a Comment