The foibles of academia

This is one of those little things that bugs me. There was an on-campus discussion about the book, Nickle and Dimed, which was supposed to be an opportunity for those who read the book to get together and give their opinions of this really interesting book about a journalist who tries to make ends meet by becoming part of the working poor.

The "conversations" they kept heralding about this book ended up being exactly what I thought they would be: a group of academics leading a conversation (essentially lecturing) over a small audience that wasn't really discussing but finding themselves being led by the professors chairing the discussion.

This is why I hate these things. What was supposed to be a huge symposium with people discussing this sort of thing with each other ended up being nothing more than a group of people who have never lived as the working poor, talking about being the working poor because they are academia and therefore should know more about this sort of thing because they study poverty on the scholarship level.

Maybe it's just me, but this seems so wrong because it's like watching a movie about the Holocaust and then telling everyone that you experienced the hardships of the survivors and victims, and now are also an expert on the horrors as well.

Stumble It!