UWP Lecturers UCSD letter
Carole Fabricant
cf7516 at gmail.com
Sat Jul 11 23:54:59 PDT 2009
Thanks a lot for forwarding the link to the complete UCSD letter and list of
signatories, Deborah.
The letter read in its entirety is even more appalling and reprehensible
than what was conveyed by the portions of it I read the other day (as bad as
they were). It's just as well I didn't get to see the whole thing at that
time; otherwise I would still be in the process of writing my satire on it,
which by this time would have grown to 30 pages (at least). There's so much
in the choice of language alone that is marvelously self-incriminating and
that lends itself perfectly to Swiftian subversion.
One of my favorites is the stirring conclusion: "we must genuinely make it
a priority to maintain UCSD (and UC) as world class institutions." The
warped sense of perspective and delusional self-aggrandizement revealed by
the precedence accorded UCSD over the entire UC system (here reduced to a
parenthetical aside, a mere afterthought) pretty much says it all.
How sad and depressing (though I can't in all honesty say surprising) it is
to be confronted with the spectacle of colleagues whose mindset makes Hobbes
seem like a benevolent and altruistic communitarian.
C.
On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 10:46 PM, Deborah Willis <dwill at ucr.edu> wrote:
> I found the complete UCSD letter and list of chairs who signed it at:
>
> http://toodumbtolivearchive.blogspot.com/2009/07/june-15-2009-dear-i-
> write-on-behalf-of.html
>
> There is a good comment posted by a UC Santa Cruz professor at the end.
> It's not hard to find this stuff by doing a google search. I used keywords
> "Scull
> letter UCSD" to find most of what I've mentioned. "Close UC Merced" works
> well
> too.
>
> Personally, I would hesitate to go for a lot of media publicity on this. I
> think
> Carole's remarks about the "loads of doofuses" out there should be
> seriously
> considered. And it may snowball in the media anyway. At first I only saw
> articles in the Merced, Fresno, and other Central Valley newspapers. But
> just
> this evening I saw an item in the San Jose Mercury News with an Associated
> Press byline. The SF Chronicle and LA Times may be next.
>
> I can no longer access the third link in my earlier email either. The
> blogger must
> have closed off her site to outsiders.
>
> Deborah
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---- Original message ----
> >Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2009 20:38:01 -0700
> >From: Carole Fabricant <cf7516 at gmail.com>
> >Subject: Re: Fwd: brilliant letter
> >To: kimberly devlin <devlinucr at earthlink.net>
> >Cc: adriana.craciun at ucr.edu, Andrea.Denny-Brown at ucr.edu,
> carole.fabricant at ucr.edu, Caroleanne.tyler at ucr.edu, Deborah.Willis at ucr.edu
> ,
> erica.edwards at ucr.edu, George.Haggerty at ucr.edu,
> heidi.braymanhackel at ucr.edu, jamestobias at mindspring.com,
> James.Tobias at ucr.edu, jennifer.doyle at ucr.edu, John.Briggs at ucr.edu,
> John.Ganim at ucr.edu, joseph.childers at ucr.edu, katherine.kinney at ucr.edu,
> keith.harris at ucr.edu, michelle.raheja at ucr.edu, rise.axelrod at ucr.edu,
> rob.latham at ucr.edu, Stanley.Stewart at ucr.edu, Steven.Axelrod at ucr.edu,
> susan.zieger at ucr.edu, Tiffany.Lopez at ucr.edu, Traise.Yamamoto at ucr.edu,
> Vorris.Nunley at ucr.edu, englecturers at lists.ucr.edu
> >
> > I agree with you, Kim. The people who chose to
> > sign this contemptible letter should be "outed" --
> > they shouldn't be allowed to hide behind
> > anonymity. I definitely think we should get hold
> > of the letter and have it printed in a California
> > publication; the LA Times is a good suggestion. Of
> > course, you realize that once it gets out there will
> > be loads of doofuses who will actually think it's a
> > great suggestion to close some of the UC campuses
> > (if not the whole university!) and will write
> > letters to the editor and to their congresspersons
> > to that effect. But that's the risk one takes in
> > a (ahem) democracy. Everyone has her say, even
> > those with a minimum of brain power and capacity for
> > critical thinking.
> >
> > Stephanie (Kay) came up with a couple of good
> > suggestions also: that we get this letter (along
> > with appropriate editorial and ironic commentary on
> > it) into the Chronicle of Higher Education; and
> > that the Academic Senates of UCSC, UCR, and UC
> > Merced either separately or jointly censure those
> > who wrote and signed the letter. This might sound
> > like overkill (and the very opposite of the far
> > subtler ironic tack I initially took) but I think if
> > UC faculty choose to circulate reprehensible ideas
> > that (at least in theory and potential) can be
> > highly damaging to their colleagues on other
> > campuses, they should be held responsible for their
> > actions. I say "actions" because what they
> > did goes beyond mere words; after all, their
> > letter was sent to UCOP with the specific intention
> > of affecting university policy). There's no
> > question here about meddling with freedom of
> > speech (hey, I'm a card-carrying member of the
> > ACLU like [probably] most of you) but when 23
> > department heads send an official signed letter to
> > the President's Office proposing a major change in
> > the system (to put it mildly!), it enters the
> > public domain and should be treated -- and responded
> > to -- as such.
> >
> > Deborah: I don't know how you found out about
> > those other four department heads, but if you've
> > discovered the entire list of faculty who signed
> > the letter, could you perhaps let all of us know
> > who they are (i.e., which departments they head).
> > I think we're all curious and dying to know that.
> > And if you've somehow unearthed a copy of the entire
> > letter, it would be great if you could send that
> > around as well -- or send us the internet
> > link where we can see the letter for ourselves.
> >
> > Speaking of which, I wasn't able to open the third
> > link that you sent us (the blog with, I gather, an
> > ironic or humorous response to the letter). It
> > sounds like at least some of you succeeded in
> > opening and reading it, but I couldn't. (The site
> > said I wasn't authorized to read anything on it, or
> > something to that effect.) Did anyone else have
> > that problem? If you know how to fix it let me
> > know -- as you're probably well aware by now
> > I'm a hopeless satire buff and hate to think I'm
> > missing out on any examples of it.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Carole
> >
> > On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 6:53 PM, kimberly devlin
> > <devlinucr at earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > dear all,
> >
> > i would be very happy to see a copy of the full
> > letter (including the names of everyone who signed
> > it) reprinted in the la times, followed by
> > carole's response. any ideas how to do so?
> > anybody with me on this one? i am impressed by
> > how many other faculty have accepted the fact that
> > the state/nation/world is in a severe depression
> > and that we, like many others (not employed by
> > uc), are going to be effected. duh. in any
> > event, thank you very much carole.
> >
> > slainte,
> >
> > kim
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Carole Fabricant
> > Sent: Jul 10, 2009 3:19 AM
> > To: adriana.craciun at ucr.edu,
> > Andrea.Denny-Brown at ucr.edu,
> > carole.fabricant at ucr.edu, cf7516 at gmail.com,
> > Caroleanne.tyler at ucr.edu,
> > Deborah.Willis at ucr.edu, erica.edwards at ucr.edu,
> > George.Haggerty at ucr.edu,
> > heidi.braymanhackel at ucr.edu,
> > jamestobias at mindspring.com,
> > James.Tobias at ucr.edu, jennifer.doyle at ucr.edu,
> > John.Briggs at ucr.edu, John.Ganim at ucr.edu,
> > joseph.childers at ucr.edu,
> > katherine.kinney at ucr.edu, keith.harris at ucr.edu,
> > devlinucr at earthlink.net,
> > michelle.raheja at ucr.edu, rise.axelrod at ucr.edu,
> > rob.latham at ucr.edu, Stanley.Stewart at ucr.edu,
> > Steven.Axelrod at ucr.edu, susan.zieger at ucr.edu,
> > Tiffany.Lopez at ucr.edu, Traise.Yamamoto at ucr.edu,
> > Vorris.Nunley at ucr.edu,
> > englecturers at listserv.ucr.edu
> > Subject: Fwd: brilliant letter
> >
> > Hey folks,
> >
> > The depths to which some of my esteemed and, er,
> > enlightened colleagues will stoop never ceases
> > to amaze me. One is never quite prepared for
> > the next act of outrage or idiocy. Way to go,
> > guy; let's hear it for colleaguiality and (more
> > importantly) class solidarity. In case you
> > don't know what I'm talking about, I'll attach a
> > newspaper article (and a half) to this email (I
> > copied it into my Word documents) which will
> > explain it all. Below you will find my
> > response to His Eminence the Distinguished
> > Professor Scull. There's no way one can deal
> > with this except through satire. (Well,
> > actually there are other ways -- but
> > nothing that can be described in an email.)
> > I heartily encourage all of you to send emails
> > to Scull congratulating him on his
> > brilliant satiric wit. It would be nice if
> > his mailbox were filled with such notes.
> > (Actually it would be even nicer it it was
> > filled with something else -- but never mind
> > that for now.)
> >
> > Read and weep. Or better yet, read and laugh,
> > and write sarcastic fan mail.
> >
> > btw, Don't forget to address him as
> > "Distinguished Professor" -- given his obvious
> > adulation of status and reputation I'm sure he
> > wouldn't want to be addressed any other way.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Carole
> >
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > From: Carole Fabricant <cf7516 at gmail.com>
> > Date: Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 3:00 AM
> > Subject: brilliant letter
> > To: ascull at ucsd.edu
> >
> > Dear Distinguished Professor Scull,
> >
> > I very much enjoyed reading portions of your
> > brilliant satire which, had you been a less
> > humble and unassuming person, you might have
> > entitled "A Modest Proposal for preventing the
> > Inferior Campuses of the UC System from being a
> > Burden to their Superiors or the University at
> > large, and for making them Beneficial to the
> > Public."
> >
> > As a Jonathan Swift specialist I can say without
> > reservation that you have perfectly captured the
> > tone and spirit of Swift's greatest satire,
> > creating a persona whom you've succeeded in
> > making into the twin brother of the Modest
> > Proposer: a man, deeply concerned for the
> > welfare of his community, who understands that
> > the sacrifice of some of its members (other
> > than himself and his fellow classmen, of
> > course) is necessary for the good of the
> > whole. Your persona, like the Modest Proposer,
> > subscribes to the sad but inescapable truth that
> > in every society the weak have to be sacrificed
> > to ensure the continued health and prosperity of
> > the strong, the have-nots must give way
> > to accommodate the desires of the haves; and
> > while expressing regret regret at being forced
> > to "contemplate very, very unpleasant choices"
> > he doesn't allow mere sentiment to soften the
> > stark nature of his proposal, or to divert him
> > from his noble purpose.
> >
> > Of course, this being a satire, we eventually
> > come to realize that the Modest Proposer's (both
> > yours and Swift's) presumed concern for the
> > welfare of his society, hence his eagerness to
> > offer solutions to its problems, is merely a
> > cover to mask his own self-interest, delusions
> > of grandeur, and dehumanizing outlook (his
> > substitution of abstract quantifiable measures
> > for human values) -- but not before we've
> > enjoyed a delightful romp through the realms of
> > the satiric grotesque.
> >
> > I must say that I thought it was a particularly
> > brilliant stroke of wit on your part to
> > substitute the image of General Motors "lopping
> > off" Hummer, Buick, Opel, Saab, "and who knows
> > what else" for Swift's central metaphor of
> > chopping up and eating Irish babies. The "who
> > knows what else" provides just the right
> > Swiftian touch, opening out the possibilities of
> > the satire in the same way that Swift's Modest
> > Proposer, after describing the many dishes the
> > babies can be cooked up into, adds that "Those
> > who are more thrifty (as I must confess the
> > times require) may flay the carcass; the skin of
> > which, artificially dressed, will make admirable
> > gloves for ladies, and summer boots for fine
> > gentlemen."
> >
> > Equally ingenious was your remark that because
> > of the funding crisis we now have to become
> > "only a nine, or an eight (and a half) campus
> > system." A lesser satirist would have left it
> > at 'nine, or eight,' but your insertion of 'a
> > half' of a campus produces an ever-so-slight
> > frisson, evoking the image of a half of a baby
> > (somehow more shocking than a whole one) being
> > stuffed into a pot to make a stew: an image
> > that serves to underscore the fundamental sadism
> > and cruel indifference beneath the Modest
> > Proposer's mask of benevolence.
> >
> > I will be teaching Swift in the fall quarter and
> > wonder whether you would be willing to come and
> > talk to my class about your perspective on the
> > art of satire -- perhaps even share with us some
> > of your other creative endeavors in this
> > field. I always tell my students that, given
> > the absurdity of the times in which we live,
> > it's no longer possible to write satire. But
> > I'm glad to say that you've proven me wrong.
> >
> > Yours sincerely (and admiringly),
> >
> > Carole Fabricant
> > Professor of English
> > University of California, Riverside
> >
> >
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucr.edu/pipermail/englecturers/attachments/20090711/ed87644e/attachment-0001.html
More information about the Englecturers
mailing list