PTSD

pick up the pieces that you love the most

Same here--no details until next month, but I think generalized whining about format is probably safe.


So it turns out that this time I was faced with an entirely different problem--not only how to approach the answers (which seem to seek both a review of the literature and an argument, requiring both bad argument--because if you want to win an argument, you don't bring up the people who disagree with you--and a bad review--because an attempt to guess who the readers think is important and what they think he said is doomed to failure, and a literature review should be geared toward accuracy in representation and establishing the existing boundaries, rather than making an argument about the topic) but how in the world to get everything important into a single essay.

Just, if I get another comment back that it looks like the Cliff Notes version of IR theory, I think I may scream. How, for the love of god and green lifesavers, are you supposed to do anything more than the Cliff Notes version in six hours? The structure demands the short version, and, what with not being able to stop time and all, you're either going to lose the quantity of competing views or specificity on those views. If they want both, they should make the exam longer.

But nobody's asking me, are they? Eh. It's done, and my paper for tomorrow isn't. So I'm off to edit the mixed methodology stuff and print out some shiny copies for the conference. System dynamics is so soothing after a stressful week.

Also, last night I learned how to spell the word twelfth. I still maintain that the f in the middle is a stupid idea. Much like the decision to leave out the good parts of pronouncing knight. You can't tell me it isn't more fun to say it in Middle English.

Right, off to be productive.

posted by Elizabeth @ 9:19 AM