The dissertation coach and writing mastery

I think most of us can relate to the utter panic that sometimes seizes us when we sit down at the computer to write. It might be one of those ultimate schadenfreude experiences; when the words are flowing and the document is scrolling ever upward, it’s a crazy rush of success, and yet when the cursor blinks and nothing is moving the experience is excruciating.

coaching I may have finally found a stride with my writing. But it has taken several years of denial, avoidance, regret, and over-scheduling myself professionally to find a way to make it happen. Not to mention lessons in project-management and a dissertation coach.

That’s right. I said it. Dissertation coach. I still feel my shoulders slump a little when I type it, I may have even felt an urge to look over my shoulder. I hired a dissertation coach. Do I have a bad advisor? Nope. But he certainly is busy with his own things. Have I forgotten how to write a paper? Nope. But I still wasn’t making progress in a way that I found satisfactory.

I view having a dissertation coach the same way I view having a physical trainer at a gym.

I view having a dissertation coach the same way I view having a physical trainer at a gym or having a cognitive-behavioral therapist (psychology folks, I’m winging it with that term). The trainer or therapist does not lift the weights or make the changes in your life that are necessary, but they teach you how to do it safely, responsibly, and in that act empower you.  Once upon a time, when I was a youthful masters student gallivanting around New Orleans, I hired (at a profoundly reduced rate) a personal trainer to help me become more fit. Why? I had never lifted weights before, and I was smart enough to know that I could seriously injure myself.

My experience with a dissertation coach is no different. I have found (sadly, and ironically) that my mentors are extremely bad at providing writing advice (not editorial feedback, but mentorly advice). What a dissertation coach has helped me find is the smartest way to go about writing a dissertation (which, unless you’re part of a very small amount of scholars who hold multiple doctorates, we only do once).

You have developed a very good writing habit. If you didn’t have a writing habit before, you certainly do now.

The other day, after nearly a month of coaching she said to me, “You have developed a very good writing habit now. If you didn’t have a writing habit before, you certainly do now.” Those of us who have looked into the self-help literature on dissertation writing know that they all preach the same thing: habit. The more frequently we do it, the better we are at it, the more measurable progress we make. The path to progress has come through a series of project-managing techniques that are so simple, it’s almost embarrassing. I’ll share them here.**

  1. Inventory your chapter and identify a portion that is either the most executable to you right away or that you’re enthusiastic about
  2. Break down each element or task into a manageable task. (i.e. not “write section on XYZ” but rather, “draft on this restricted topic for XYZ for 25 minutes,” / “read article on ABC for topic XYZ for 25 minutes”)
  3. Have a daily writing/researching plan for every day, both aspects are important. The plan should be laid out in advance of working. If you push to exhaustion, you will be less likely to work or make good progress the next day.
  4. Have dedicated time off from writing.
  5. Recognize that writing at the doctoral level cannot and should not be done like other writing you’ve done (undergraduate, graduate seminar papers etc.) You cannot sit down and write it line by line and expect good work. The stakes are higher and the approach should be different. Exploratory and draft writing is crucial to producing subsequent versions that are readable and sound.

Some of you might have gotten to this point faster, and that’s great. What has certainly helped me the most is having a feedback mechanism. Our faculty are often far too busy to manage us the way we wish they would. The coach assists me in developing daily plans for an entire week each week, and comments on my plan daily as I make progress, delivering feedback and advice about approaching tasks.

The take-away? I’m developing project-management skills that can apply to both professional and personal goals. There is no pressure from the organization I work with to continue services. When I feel I’ve grown beyond them, they’re thrilled for that development.

What does your writing habit look like? I’d love to know.

** I’m a great fan of using the Pomodoro technique.


On knowing, a new pillory

John_Waller_in_pillorySomeone has reinterpreted the pillory–it was only a matter of time, really. Right? It might make me an awful person, insensitive to a whole range of questions (I hear your future rants, ranters), but I am experiencing a certain schadenfreude in the very concept of this blog, Public Shaming, where certain types of social media detritus are exposed.

In all seriousness, I have become very interested in social media (like the rest of academia) and its role in the creation of knowledge. Because, clearly, this type of trending seems self-perpetuated where the volume of believers outweighs the ‘facts.’ (Not that this is new, cf belief)

I know because they know instead of I know because I checked.   This isn’t a new by any stretch of the imagination. But with the instantaneous proliferation of ‘knowing,’ is common knowledge even knowledge anymore?

Knowing is hard.


What he learned from gay sex and Eve Ensler

I’m not the biggest fan of recycling other people’s writing, but I do like to pass along things I find thought-provoking and important.  I came across this Huffington Post article by Simon Mortiz, I was absolutely floored by its scope.

Image

image credit: garybedard.blogspot.com

As a gay man, I find it thought-provoking and entirely relevant to the world we live in. But, I hope there is a lesson we can all learn from Moritz’s argument about gender and the role it plays (and how it dictates) all our lives.

I’m not interested in rehashing the last 25 years of progressive gender theory here (though who doesn’t love a good Butler read), though I am going to include this link as well, to a Ted Talk by Eve Ensler that one reader attached to the Huff Post article.


Literature hacked to death at *-Mart

I’m going to spare the rant about the quality of the book – most people have already expressed it.  I came across a great blog post this morning (as I am avoiding doing any type of grading or producing). The writer raises a fear that I’ve had for a while now. In the post  Assault on Literature through 50 Shades of Yuck, the writer laments the current phenomenon of inserting into already existing stories.

The prime example here is the phenomenon that swept the world by storm, Pride and Prejudice and Zombies.   Yeah yeah, I can hear the post-modern protests already. But But But. It’s funny. But but but, it’s not hurting anyone. But but but lighten up.

book knifeI’d be less worried if I knew that everyone’s spawn actually knew works of literature. I’m disheartened on a regular basis that they do not, in fact, know much about literature at all (or care, or want to care). I fear the parody of these works (and the thriller/comedy/sex ification of them) is replacing the works themselves (insert rant on education/values/art/entertainment).

Hey, I think spoofs are funny. I think they’re only a good idea, however, when we know what they’re making fun of and why.

The decade of the reboot and the remake (not that these haven’t existed before) in such proliferation and zeal has annoyed me. I’ve enjoyed some, loathed others. But I knew the originals. Sure, some are going to argue that the reboot or remake may inspire seeing the originals. Ok, but that’s giving people a lot of credit. Yet, I’ll readily believe that people will see the original movie before they read the original book.

Flaubert spent 5 years writing Madame Bovary. Not due to laziness, but rather to an obsessive attention to words, sentences, and sounds.

I wonder how long the mommy porn author took to copy Sade’s homework before class.


Distractions

Simias-egg

Cheating on Academic Sins with an alter ego.

#priceless.

Technēpoesie.


Abracadabra

Make it so.

Or so we all heard for a good 7 years in the late 80s and early 90s. More of an imperative than an performative utterance, it gets us a little closer to the bull’s eye. Recently, a judge in France ruled the auction of Hopi masks legal, as the previous owner had obtained them legally.  That seems logical.

Image

Art Et Communication / Ho / EPA
An undated handout picture provided by Art et Communication press office in Paris, France on April 11, 2013 shows a mask entitled ‘Angwusnasomtaqa’ or ‘Tumas Crow Mother’ as part of the ‘Katsinam Masks’ auction sale at Drouot-Richelieu. care of worldnews.nbcnews.com

Yet, the complication is in the role the masks play for the Hopi, who view them as living things, sacred beings. Naturally, money and collecting are involved (un passe-temps du 19e siècle), so the dispute over the masks’–scratch that. The dispute over the legality of the sale was hauled before a judge, who subsequently ruled that since the current owner had obtained them legally, years before, the masks could be legally auctioned.

The most frightening part, I think is the power that the law wielded here and invested in others:

Before starting, the auctioneer, Gilles Néret-Minet, told the crowd that the sale had been found by a judge to be perfectly legal, and that the objects were no longer sacred but had become  “important works of art.”

The ability of language to perform is powerful indeed. Big magic. In one deft tongue maneuver, Néret-Minet changed the status of the masks from sacred beings to important objects all because of another performative utterance, the legal ruling.

The irony, perhaps, is in this line:

[Néret-Minet] added, “In France you cannot just up and seize the property of a person that is lawfully his.”

Whew, well I sure feel better now.

Suddenly, Judith Butler, Michel Foucault, Jacques Derrida, and Eve Kosofsky Sedgewick surge out of the dry pages of theory and into the consequence-filled world of practice.


Internationally righting: gay rights, emerging equalities, Foreign Affairs

This needs some international attention and hopefully a vote.  Standing in my friend’s kitchen in her 4th story walk-up, I had the pleasure of meeting an engaging thinker.  Earlier in the day, I had been frolicking about with a friend when we came upon a campaign table for the President.  Naturally we shelled out some money for campaign swag and got some stickers too.  Merrily, and some what obliviously, I walked around with a campaign sticker on my shirt for the rest of the day–which as it happens was a conversation starter.

As it turns out, this engaging thinker, Mr. Pérez,  wrote an article on advancing gay rights internationally that may be featured in Foreign Affairs magazine with the help of supporters. In the era of social media, apparently even FA wants le peuple to choose its feature (which I suppose is also a creative way of foisting the decision on everyone else, thus escaping any residual messiness).  In a piece promoting his article and the vote that FA has called for, Pérez writes:

that some will question the validity of this topic being considered “the stuff of serious foreign affairs.” And judging by some of the comments made about my essay so far, I was right. It is shortsighted to assume that real foreign affairs is limited to discussions of war, territorial disputes, nuclear weapons, terrorism and the like.

We cannot forget that combating anti-gay discrimination touches upon many matters that are also of import to foreign policy: From war crimes in the Democratic Republic of the Congo to public health concerns in Botswana, there are many foreign policy implications to antigay discrimination throughout the world that may not be evident to those who conceive of U.S. foreign policy and gay rights as distinct and unrelated concepts. For as the world becomes more diverse and complex, so [too] will foreign affairs matters become more diverse and complex.

In a time when we still haven’t grown beyond this startling word count of antigay speech, perhaps we should all give Mr. Pérez’s article a read and head over to place a vote. After all, if we don’t decide to raise our hands and say, “this is important,” who else will?  Certainly not the other tweeters scrolling on that page.

See this article from Hunter College for Mr. Pérez’s “Emerging Equality: Gay Rights as a Priority of U.S. Foreign Policy,”  and for voting instructions.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 48 other followers