Previous post
We find ourselves again immersed in the world of academia. The tale today comes to us from Iowa State where a professor decided to profess social justice on a syllabus.
Not the first time a nutty professor went, well…nutty.
The university, the bastion of free thought, where children become free-thinking adults, guided by professors in lecture halls that shape these young minds, is only a bastion of free thought if one’s thoughts align with their own. Take this recent Iowa State University professor’s warning to her students.
GIANT WARNING: any instances of othering that you participate in intentionally (racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, sorophobia, transphobia, classism, mocking of mental health issues, body shaming, etc) in class are grounds for dismissal from the classroom. The same goes for any papers/projects: you cannot choose any topic that takes at its base that one side doesn’t deserve the same basic human rights as you do (ie: no arguments against gay marriage, abortion, Black Lives Matter, etc). I take this seriously.”-Chloe N. Clark
Chloe Clark is a professor of Creative Writing at Iowa State who has apparently published a book of poetry entitled, Your Strange Fortune, where she discusses “myths to monsters, ghosts to zombies, fairy tales to the Apocalypse that, for this poet and so many today, is ‘just/the fact of life.‘
The “facts of life”, according to professor Chloe N. Clark? College composition with “a focus on rhetorical arguments.” Clark, apparently, lectures on Monster Theory, Genre, Speculative Writing, and Fan Studies. One of Clark’s collections of poetry is entitled The Science of Unvanishing Objects which is “propelled by the unknown, dealing with query, dreams, and memories, which prove unreliable, yet have the potential to remain solid and legitimate as if they are physical objects.” Whatever.
Basically, the kind of poetry you hear in coffee houses with tons of literary references that you don’t dare to ask about for fear of looking stupid. Been there, done that scene back in the day.
Some of you might be asking, what exactly is “monster theory”, anyway? According to this, monster theory is a consideration of beasts, demons, freaks and fiends as symbolic expressions of cultural unease that pervade a society and shape its collective behavior. Clark combines this with her knowledge o fan studies (a field of scholarly research focused on media fans and fan cultures) in her writing and lessons. This is some of the work she’s dabbled in to obtain a position as a professor at a university. Smells like white privilege to me.
Most Creative Writing majors will take Clark’s class and abide by her giant, monstrous warning. There will be no othering. In Chloe Clark’s classroom and she takes this seriously.There will be no expression other than the expression Ms. Clark wants students to convey. There will be no other trains of thought that will be acknowledged in this class. Get it? Got it? Good. There will be no harshing Chloe’s mellow. There will be no realities brought up during lecture that will interfere with Chloe’s reality of uh, monsters, fairies, zombies, ghosts and basic human rights…like abortion.
And yet, once again, the harsh irony is lost upon our professors, the intellectually elite. Who, indeed are the beasts, the demons, the freaks and fiends that represent this cultural unease that shape its collective behavior? Chloe N. Clark seems to think it’s the pro-life student or the student that does not follow along with the Marxist philosophies behind the BLM movement. I happen to think there are some pretty fantastic beasts and we saw them last night! These undesirables will be removed from her bubble of fantasy and fan fiction tout suite! There will be no room for discourse or further arguments. In fact, she and some of her fellow students will probably need to go to a safe space and cuddle with a stuffed animal. Professors gonna profess from their sheltered classrooms of woke ideology. Students, follow Clark’s GIANT, beastly warning and save your parents’ hard-earned money and for crying out loud, don’t go into student loan debt for this!
Photo Credit: FlickR/Creative Commons/Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic (CC BY-SA 2.0)
GWB says: any topic that takes at its base that one side doesn’t deserve the same basic human rights as you do
Well, there’s an invalid premise right there. The things she lists are NOT issues of “the same basic human rights”, but rather the diminution of some human rights (abortion) and special rights (calling two guys or gals a “marriage”) and claims that are bogus (yes, BLM, but it’s based on a premise that isn’t true – that it’s pervasive racism rather than general police abuse issues).
That’s on top of the idea that she should be about demonstrating that all issues must be supported with proper logic and argumentation and facts. She’s a propagandist, not a teacher.
“a focus on rhetorical arguments.”
Sounds to me like that’s not what she’s focused on at all.
Whatever.
Well, it’s actually an interesting statement. And, in isolation, could be taken as a great starting point for a philosophical debate. (My first point would be a question of how are queries unreliable? I mean, if they’re asked by an idiot, they might be, but normally queries are only unreliable in that they might not know what it is they need to be asking. </egghead> )
Been there, done that scene back in the day.
Heck, I did it in Paris. On La Rive Gauche, even. 😉
There will be no othering.
Funny, because her topic is partly based in “othering”. But the “othering” of myth and fable can also be a way of bringing something scary into our lives in a safe way, allowing them to become an acceptable part. IOW, she’s shallow at her topic, I’m guessing.
GWB says: if they’re asked by an idiot
Meant to put in one of my favorite demotivation poster quotes:
There are no stupid questions.
But there are a LOT of inquisitive idiots.
This is another great article on the complete collapse of Big Education. The university has become an expensive farce. It’s one of the things that will be part of the separation of peoples in the US. I’m not confident that people like this University Prof Karen can live in tandem with regular people. She is a chimera. Unfortunately, I think the ‘Great Separation’ has started.
https://education-ny.blogspot.com/2020/08/the-cv-era-has-been-catalyst-for-great.html
Brian Brandt says: From another report (redstate.com) on this professor –
“As this class goes alongside WGS 201, it will view the concepts of rhetoric and arguments through the gaze of “monster theory.”
I looked up WGS 201 on the Iowa State website. It is, predictably, Women’s and Gender Studies.
John Hascall says: This situation was corrected as soon as the university was made aware of it. The university’s statement:
“The syllabus statement as written was inconsistent with the university’s standards and its commitment to the First Amendment rights of students. After reviewing this issue with the faculty member, the syllabus has been corrected to ensure it is consistent with university policy. Moreover, the faculty member is being provided additional information regarding the First Amendment policies of the university.
Iowa State is firmly committed to protecting the First Amendment rights of its students, faculty, and staff. With respect to student expression in the classroom, including the completion of assignments, the university does not take disciplinary action against students based on the content or viewpoints expressed in their speech.”
GWB says: Good. Now do something about the professors and administrators who think otherwise.
6 Comments