>At 11:14 AM 3/12/01 +0200, Peter van Heusden wrote:
>>In turn, this feeds into a
>>kind of identification with the job which is exploited by managers,
>>what I've called in the past '2nd order Taylorism'.
>
>YES!!!!
>
>but it is the same for academics too, yes? (and probably every
>other profession -- which is how professionals are exploited in a
>specific kind of way without ever recognizing that they are). what
>we write is hard work, yes. but it is dependent on all kinds of
>other labor: editors, janitors, reviewers, the cashier who
>makes/sells us our coffee, our students/peers with whom we get into
>arguments/discussions, the cook who makes our lunches, etc. a
>preface often reflect this dependence on others and heck it's even
>got a structure to it as to who you thank first: personal thank
>yous are last. (always reminds me of the preface to _End of the
>Line_ [a diss>book] where she thanks her therapist in the "personal"
>section!!!)
Way back in grad school, I had a pretentious professor of theory, who liked to play the chic radical. He had us put the desks in a circle, so we could address each other, and avoid the hierarchical regimentation of rows headed by Teach. The cleaning woman came in at the beginning of class one day and asked us to put the desks back in rows after the class was over, so she didn't have to do it. Once she was safely out of the room, he said, "What does a janitor know about pedagogy?"
Doug