PTSD

Notes on a prospectus defense, part one

Some of our readers will know the context for this. The rest of you will just have to make something up. Do note the helpful illustrations, which I have scanned from the original notes.

We sat quietly and calmly for the first 35 minutes of this defense. Eventually, though, the snark potential reached critical mass, and I was forced to choose between passing a note to Priya or watching my brain crawl out my ear and break a window to escape. Things went swimmingly for the first thirty minutes. Then everything went a bit pear shaped.

E: So maybe not so much with the tattoo not showing when I wear pants. Should have checked that, I guess.

P: :)

E: Interesting crowd dynamic in here—six white guys and us.

P: At least the white guys are not *all* dead. Debatable?

E: That’s true—but no chance of any of them being mistaken for terrorists at a neighborhood watch meeting.

P: Apparently, I could be.

[One committee member begins asking a Question that Never Ends]

(What’s this bloke on about?)

E: “The practice of terrorism in a suburban neighborhood.” This would be what? Poisoned Girl Scout cookies? Gangs of suicide soccer moms? That guy on the corner who refuses to mow his grass on Sunday, so it’s always the wrong length?

P: Why don’t we *all* have this bloke on our panel? No need to answer questions! I thought the project was about using / noting what terrorism did in specific situations—this guy seems to be doing “what is terrorism?”

[The committee member finishes asking the Question that Never Ends. It lasted 4.5 minutes. Felt like an hour.]

E: I have no idea what this guy is talking about, really. Hey, did you get The MacGeek’s cd to him yet?



P: Yes, *did*. The MacGeek’s on my team now since he likes 2nd season Doctor episodes. J

RandomStudent (RS) could *blast* him about knowledge as perspective, etc. Silly bloke on the phone! As if knowing Arabic would lead to a complete picture. Bah.

E: Seems to think that there’s some way to get at what “terrorism” really is—but that quote from RS’s proposal makes it clear that he doesn’t. This could be bad.

P: I can see trouble brewing for RS, what with The One Who Must Be Named and this bloke (in the future). “Political tactic”? NOT generalizable!!

At least he talks on and on…

E: Oh my god, this guy is a nightmare. Other than the question thing. Does he have a point?

P: Okay, I want to help out now (but not sure how). Should say not *generalizable*--the bloke seems to think it is! I can see trouble looming in the future.

posted by Elizabeth @ 9:41 PM