Doctoral student

>doctoral student
>in reality I have never read many books
>people ask if I read this or that
>mfw

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul-Loup_Sulitzer
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Going for a PhD in what OP?

literature xD
also not telling anything more because stalk

The important thing is that you have opinions on the books OP, not that you've read them

the essence of Veeky Forums

>He doesn't even tell us what his dissertation is about.

Veeky Forums knows

Andrew Klavan explaining how he got through college without reading any books:

I developed a technique that allowed me to convincingly pretend to have read any book without ever opening it. I discovered that if you delivered yourself of a radical negative and knowing tone, no one ever questioned whether you had actually cracked the binding of the thing or not. If you declared that Moby Dick was a crashing bore; if you said The Scarlet Letter was overwritten and irrelevant; if you proclaimed The Red Badge of Courage was an act of literary fakery, the teacher's attention shifted from the novel itself to you, your brash elegance, your haughty sophistication, the shock and cleverness of your position. It never occurred to anyone to put my knowledge to the test or make me support my point of view with specific examples.

haha voldemors

Norek do domu!

spierdalaj Danka

this is pretty much the essence of any humanities phd program. at a certain point, you will realize that a surprising number of tenured professors are shockingly intellectually shallow.

I am realizing it now. None of them knew Pynchon, for example.
t. Europe

why would a literature professor need to know a YA author?

I said Pynchon!
not GreenJohn!

I want Pinecone to write a parody YA novel in which he has a character called GreenJohn who is just a giant fucking satire of John Green.

You should ask Daniel Pennac to do it. He once parodied Paul Loup Sulitzer and it was amazing and incredible.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul-Loup_Sulitzer

>mfw John Green is Pynchon's apprentice and that's the irony

it's more the product of dividing the study of literature into different fields, categorized by identity. this is compounded by the lack of a general curriculum at most universities these days. i earned an undergrad degree concentrating in american lit without ever having read hawthorne or james in a course, for example.

He still hasn't posted the subject of his dissertation.

this is further to imply that the typical tenured literature professor's only experience with books should be "whatever he had to have read for school"

i didn't say "should be" but yes that is typically the reality. most professors have a good grasp on whatever scholarly trend was hip when they were writing their first two books or so (i.e. before they got tenure). a lot of grad school is just reading other people's interpretations of books. so often a grad student's or professor's knowledge of a work is second hand.

well thank you for that assertation then Mr. Academia Weekly, don't let me stop you from being 'in circulation'

bump

this would work in high school at least