Doing work while grouchy

When I'm working while feeling a bit down and out, things like this REALLY piss me off: "The first is the structural poverty of the African continent. By structural poverty, we refer to the lack of structures, both concrete and ideological, that function to ensure social continuity."

The offending phrase is 'structural poverty'. 'Structural poverty' could mean economic poverty caused by structural factors, but the author uses it to mean the poverty of structures, in which case shouldn't he have used something like 'lack of structural capacity'????? Or why didn't he just use 'lack of structures'???? Save himself having to define it again in the next line? What benefit is there in using 'structural poverty'? In any case his definition is so broad that it covers everything - policy structures, administrative structures, transport and communications, legal structures, political structures, social structures, ideological structures. Plus what do you mean by 'ensuring social continuity'????? Geographically? Temporally? What is social continuity anyway? You might as well draw a smiley face in place of all that crap.

Sometimes the quality of articles in supposedly academic journals is horrendous. I need to smash my head against a wall. Admittedly I have to find a hard enough wall.

Today it seems as if the whole world has forgotten how to use their brain and mouths (and pens. and handphones) at the same time. *glares at LSB*

Also, typos! What are typos doing in a peer-reviewed journal?????? It's typos galore here! Wth!

Have finished reading the whole article, and am still disgusted. He starts off with talking about various strands of Pan-Africanism, gives us a whole list of difficulties with African integration, and his conclusion has no relation to what he's talked about earlier. It's a version of 'I argue X because of A, B, C, unfortunately, A, B, & C are irrelevant to my argument'.

Today had better not get any worse.

note from LSB's book

"Guha thought of consciousness - and therefore of peasant subjecthood - as something immanent in the very practies of peasant insurgency. Elementary Aspects is a study of the practices of insurgent peasants in colonial India, not of a reified category called consciousness. The aim of the book was to bring out the collective imagination inherent in the practices of peasant rebellion. Guha makes no claim that the insurgent consciousness that he discusses is indeed conscious, that it existed inside the heasd of peasants. He does not equate consciousness with the subject's view of himself. Rather, he examines rebel practices to decipher the particular relationship - between elites and subalterns and among subalterns themselves - that are acted out in them and then attempts to derive from these relationships the elementary structure, as it were, of the consciousness or imagination inherent in those relationships."

- Dipesh Chakrabarty, Habitations of Modernity, pp.15-16

The Literature Available to Me

A sample of titles on Africa available at Borders:

The Rebel's Hour

Where Soldiers Fear to Tread

Memoirs of a Boy Soldier

They Poured Fire on Us from the Sky

Escape from Slavery

Black Skin, White Marks

We Wish to Inform You that Tomorrow We'll be Killed with our Families

Africa: Altered States, Ordinary Miracles

Unbowed

Come on now. I don't know why everyone says Borders is good for acad books. It actually sucks for international relations (& apparently Africa too). Not that Kino is any better for Africa, but at least it has more academic IR books.

Also, I'm feeling nervous about Aber, and wondering why online guides on Aber seem to list more pubs than restaurants.

Cry, the Beloved Country

"Cry, the beloved country, for the unborn child that is the inheritor of our fear. Let him not love the earth too deeply. Let him not laugh too gladly when the water runs through his fingers, nor stand too silent when the setting sun makes red the veld with fire. Let him not be too moved when the birds of his land are singing, nor give too much of his heart to a mountain or a valley. For fear will rob him of all if he gives too much."

- Alan Paton

Hedley Bull is the coolest

In his introduction to Martin Wight's International Theory:

"Wight's atttitude towards the behaviourists was the source of one of my disagreements with him. I felt that they represented a significant challenge and that it was important to understand them and engage in debate with them. The correct strategy, it appeared to me, was to sit at their feet, to study their position until one could state their own arguments better than they could and then - when they were least suspecting - to turn on them and slaughter them in an academic Massacre of Glencoe. Wight entertained none of these bloody thoughts. He made no serious effort to study the behaviourists and in effect ignored them." p.xi

Pissed

with African historians.

As much as it's not very PC to say so, and insofar as my rather scanty knowledge of the literature allows me to make sweeping statements on the subject.

But if they don't start acknowledging that the Europeans weren't the only brutal murderers in their history, they should stop writing.

Dissertation woes

A very uncharacteristic email that I sent off a few minutes ago:

Dear Prof,

I've just submitted my paper on ASEAN and international society, and I'm afraid it's not very pretty. I'm truly apologetic, largely because the preceding sentence is a gross understatement. Unfortunately, the entire dissertation project has also degenerated into similar ugliness. I am trying very hard to give some structure to my ideas, but I can't seem to get past the theoretical chapter. Would you be able to make it for consultation this Wed or Fri afternoon? Thank you.

Regards,
Elaine

That just about says it all.

WTH?

The ES does come close to Wendtian constructivism on one point: materialism vs idealism. Both are in-between positions here, the ES somewhat more materialist than all/most constructivists. But they differ on a whole complex of other questions (notably the view of language, rationality, analysts role, and IR theory/theories) and this brings the ES closer to classical realism and post-structuralism, than to constructivism.
- Ole Waever, 1999.

ARGH! Stop screwing with my mind! That was NOT what I thought the ES was! And how can you mention classical realism and post-structuralism in the same breath? How?!?! How could you? Now what am I supposed to do? Now I know nothing!

------ (edited)

Ok, now that I've calmed down somewhat.

It seems I always get stuck on the theory, esp. the definitions... largely because I still believe that half the argument is won by definitions and categorization. I never seem to get to the application of theory. Ok I admit, it's also partly because I prefer theory to application.

This was exactly what happened to my HT, which was supposed to be an application of theory, but ended up being a meaningless 10,000 word exposition on a minor theoretical point that I could have dealt with in 2 sentences. Oh the benefits of hindsight.

I have to stop reading these theory-related articles and actually get down to application. Soon. As soon as I've got this latest bit figured out.

Work

I need to start thinking about work. Seriously. So I'll combine work and blogging as usual.

I need to write a paper showing that ASEAN is an international society, and it'll probably be more difficult than I initially thought. I'll need to take on realism, constructivism (especially constructivism!) and I'll have to say a word or two on regime theory. The thing is, I have to distinguish between arguing for the merits of the English School and arguing that ASEAN is an international society. I'm so used to arguing the first that I've to be very careful not to mix up the 2 arguments (even though they obviously overlap). So... I know that regime theory is different from ES theories - but the question is, is a regime different from an international society?

Assuming I'm able to do that, I've got to look at the 'meat' of international society theory. What does it mean when you say a group of states form an international society? Since I'm adopting the Hedley Bull approach, I'll probably split it into rules and institutions. So I'll be looking at constitutive, coexistence and cooperative rules, and here I'll have to go back to the formal documents + the 'ASEAN Way'. I'll have to look at instances where these rules came into effect. I'll also have to look at balance of power as the primary primary institution, and see if balance of power in ASEAN fits Bull's framework. And then obviously I'll have to deal with the rest of the institutions. War, especially, stands out, and I'll have to deal with the difference between 'classical' ES theory and practice in ASEAN. Throughout this I'll probably have to keep mentioning common interests and values, and how these common interests and values led states to agree on common rules & institutions.

I suspect (especially when talking about bop) that I'll be borrowing a lot from my lecturer's own work. Which I don't like. I don't know how I can bring anything new, and I'd like to at least put up a small defence (however feeble) against my lecturer's arguments. So I should probably take a close look at his book (haha. sighz).

I can probably take issue with Narine's idea of Southeast Asian international society. (assuming the quote I have is representative of his work)

Note to self: when dealing with Constructivism I should also look at ASEAN-6 vs the rest, and then adopt Narine's point about identity not being a precondition for cooperation.

2nd note to self: I'll have to deal with the changes in the international society throughout ASEAN's history. ASEAN expansion would be a problem in terms of organization of the paper.

I'm writing another paper on performance legitimacy in Singapore, and how it has been shaped by discourses.

Surprisingly, I find that I'm more interested during discussions of Singapore politics than discussions about anything else.

For this one I want to narrow down what I mean by 'shaping' performance legitimacy. 'Shape' in what way?

I have to do more theoretical work on 'performance legitimacy'.

I'm also concerned about sources and causal links. So even though there's stuff in the secondary literature to back me up, I'll want to look at more recent official statements etc.

Hopelessly sleepy. Argh.

Why I need a thesis supervisor with a sense of humour

Thesis Sup (referring to outline): So, what do you mean by 'ASEAN multilateralism'?

Me: Erm... well... I guess the ASEAN Way? Wait, what am I thinking. Erm... give me a minute. *closes eyes, opens eyes, but he hasn't disappeared yet* I guess I mean ASEAN attempts at multilateral diplomacy?

...

TS: What is this section supposed to accomplish?

Me: Hmmm. I think I thought that with this section, I could... *blah*

...

TS: Ok, so you can review this book for next Friday.

Me: Erm, the deadline for the book review is this Friday.

TS: The deadline is this Friday and you haven't even chosen your book?

Me: *laughs nervously* *bites tongue to stop self from telling him I also have an essay due tomorrow that I haven't started on*

(Yes, I know my classmates talked to you about the book review like, 3 weeks ago. Damn those civil servants.)

...

TS: What is your writing style? Are you the type who waits till the last minute to write or...

Me: *nods emphatically*

TS: I had a feeling you would say that.

Me: *kicks self for nodding too emphatically*

...

TS: It sounds exciting.

Me: *realizing that nothing is going to improve my image, sticks tongue out at him and tries to act cute*

In the end, I waltzed out of his office with a pink, furry halo of hard-earned bimboticness.

He saw the sheen of stark panic in my eyes, and verily, he was amused.

This is also the reason why I avoid meeting my supervisors until I've submitted my thesis. Just so they don't get scared off.

tragedy of epic proportions

*panic*

My violin teacher has been mumbling, crone-like, throughout my classes, and all I can make out are ominous phrases like 'late again' 'going to fail' 'grade 8' 'needs practice' 'newt's tail'.

My thesis sup has very nicely allowed extended my deadline, but has glared at me in class when I resolutely refuse to contribute to the discussion (largely because I haven't read for the class). He has also reminded me that whatever the case, I must see him by the end of the year. Which means I get an extension of about... 1? 2? weeks. Not enough.

I'm trying to console myself for the failure of a test I haven't taken. I know I won't pass already.

My readings are piling up, and I'm going to miss 2 very important classes.

It looks like next year I'll be making another major commitment.

I need this trip to be over and done with.

*cry*

gloating

Gloat.

Gloat.

Gloat some more.

Mwahahahaha I got the dissertation supervisor I wanted! *does crazy dance*

Gloat.

Gloat.

Ok enough of that.

The ceiling light in my bedroom is making a humming/buzzing noise that only my sis and I can hear. If I didn't know better I'd think it's some kind of divine/satanic/ghostly/alien communication directed specifically at myself and my worthy sibling.

I do know better, so when the jack-of-all-trades uncle came by to help us with various stuff today (aka the leaky toilet, the busted light - yes, my house is falling apart), I asked him if he could help me with it. Nope, he can't hear the noise. Nope, his assistant can't hear it either. It didn't help that my mum kept saying that no one could hear it but my sister and I. They looked at me strangely.

Hmmm.

Hello? Is anyone out there? Are you trying to tell us something? Stop mumbling like Jay and tell us what you want.

Gloat.