A Tangled Affair

For the past couple of months a peculiar drama has been unfolding on an academic listserv to which I subscribe. On any given day, you are likely to receive at least 10-15 messages from people advertising jobs, posting CFPS for journals or conferences, posing pedagogical questions, etc. The list is ruled with a firm hand by a techie-type matriarch who lurks about making sure the topics and postings are confined to areas of teaching and NOT politics. Often times, people will stray off course, only to be publicly admonished for an "off topic" post. Should one accrue multiple warnings from the self described "nag," all privileges to list will be revoked. Personally, I think her rationale for keeping the listserv so narrowly focused is stupid. I don't think one can be a good teacher without understanding how one's pedagogy is influenced by politics and political discussions. But, I digress.

It would appear the nag has "left the building" as they say, because a troubling, yet fascinating, academic drama has been unfolding without a peep from our ever diligent list serve owner. The drama concerns a well known academic researcher (a mentor to a former "friend" (deep sarcasm here) of ours) and her involvement, er, "investigation" into a controversy surrounding the publication of a 2003 book by a researcher/scientist some have considered an unethical, hack, peddling in pseudo scientific theories re sexuality. The well known (and well respected--at least before this broke out) researcher has taken it upon herself to write a 60 page essay about the controversy--essentially determining that the while the science and research is shoddy, the attacks on this work by detractors, is far worse. Obviously, this essay is being read by many as an "apology" for the 2003 publication . . . drawing the ire of many, and refueling the controversy.

A few months ago a CFP was posted to the listserv for a panel critiquing both the 2003 monograph and the 2007 "investigation" by a grad student. Unfortunately, the author of the 2007 investigation is on the list and had a very public, meltdown. For the past several weeks she has written a torrent of hateful emails accusing these people (including the grad student) of attempts to "ruin" her reputation in the same manner they tried with the author of the 2003 study. Threats of lawsuits based on defamation of character have been made . . . all on this listserv! What would compel such an implosion? Isn't "critique" the heart of academic inquiry? Why the fuss? Why would a well known academic feel threatened by a conference session organized by a grad student?

More importantly, why am I so fucking absorbed into this drama?

Life in the academy is a tangled affair. It's also a very, very, small world. The researcher who is imploding on the list happens to be the mentor of a person that I had the unfortunate occasion to be "friends" with at my last institution. And, like mentor, like student, this "friend" exhibited the same type of arrogance and bullish behavior her mentor has been exhibiting on the list.

I've gotten some pleasure, as shameful as it is to admit, from all of this mess. I always wondered if there ever would be justice in the world . . . if people who really screwed people over would ever experience the pain and hurt they inflict on others (an eye for an eye? perhaps). This "friend" would use her association with her mentor as a trump card--a badge advertising how cool she was to be affiliated with such a "top notch" researcher in the field . . .and now, what must she be feeling as her mentor slowly goes down in flames, publicly humiliating herself in front of peers?

Schadenfreude? Absolutely.