Posts: 327
Threads: 6
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation:
0
I sort of agree, particularly noticeable in the Classics. Especially this stupid concept of "public impact".
Jass
Posts: 1,550
Threads: 81
Joined: Oct 2006
Reputation:
49
I can't speak to the economic situation in the UK. I think that recognizing public impact is a good thing (after all, the reason the public pays academics is to increase knowledge of things they are curious about) but I can't speak to the metrics used in the UK. It may be that humanists are encouraged to publish too much.
I think that some of the things which Stanley talks about are a symptom of attempts to impose values from the world of commerce onto every other sphere of life. We see this when people state straightfaced that higher education is obviously for professional training (even though I have never heard of a society where this was the main purpose of higher education); when people are urged to develop a personal brand or think about their sexual market value (!); and when academics are encouraged to market their works like hucksters. The values of an honourable academic are fundamentally different from those suited to getting rich as an author or media personality.
Nullis in verba
I have not checked this forum frequently since 2013, but I hope that these old posts have some value. I now have
a blog on books, swords, and the curious things humans do with them.
Posts: 15,116
Threads: 415
Joined: Mar 2002
Reputation:
78
It's not so much to do with economics as it has to with modern media. For years now we have 'popular' history channels and documentaries that show mediocre to bad stuff, lined with names from the academic world. Historians as well as archaeologists, no doubt riding the waves of 'Indiana Jones' and similar movies, have been lured into 'easy stardom' by donning a hat and entering the limelight. The popularity of such shows has no doubt caused a movement in which academics can be tempted to ‘spice up’ their findings in order to follow the needs of the modern media.
For apart from the tv, the press is also heavily involved in ‘glamourizing’ history and archaeology. Every publication, in order to receive any attention, needs to be ‘ground-breaking’, ‘the find of the century’ or ‘proof of the Bible’ and all that. No doubt that many academics, following these leads, go for fast-selling, ‘popular’ books, instead of a career in the dark alleys of an academic institute, where the pay is bad, the glory is absent and the hours long.
Our fellow member Jona has written a lot to the point stuff about this in recent years.
