Very very odd dilemma
I finally finished my long rambling rough draft of the final paper for British Radicals class. I wasn't happy with it. I felt like I was bitching too ch.

Just to update everyone on that one. I am embarrassed that I not only wrote my final paper on the novel Swastika Night sucking a big one (and to a lesser extent 1984 and Brave New World sucking - but not as bad as Swastika Night) but that it ran for 31 pages. 31 pages to rant and rave against Swastika Night, dystopian novels, academic feminism, the stupid word "heternormative" and modern criticism (the last two are indictments against Orwell for thinking that people turn stupid when they start shrinking their words like in Newspeak. THis terribly doubleplusungood notion has inspired generations of Feminist, New Historicist and Deconstructionist critics to create brand new words that mean NOTHING. NOTHING! NOTHING! Yeah Fuck you Mary Daley and your Gyn/Ecology Lesbian Nun theories - you crazy whackjob. ANd really fuck foucoult - although that can't be said often enough - for not only writing stupid shit but using long involved passages, made up words and complicated language to say your stupid shit (like the one about insanity being a socially engineered prejudice - yeah some of those socially engineered fucks think that Nixon is talking to them from the radio and telling them to kill you.) So I like Orwell and I don't think Orwell would take the Newspeak any farther than one book and that the Deconstructionist Language of Bullshit Speak would not win his endorsement - but I still want to blame him for 50 years of shoddy academic literary criticism hiding under the guise of mumblemouth word games)

I also said that dystopian novels are poor written science fiction novels, but critics love them because critics can attach themselves to them and do their own sermons under the guise of criticism. Snobs can cheer on Aldous Huxley's snobbish Brave New WOrld. Paranoid radicals can talk about 1984 being just around the corner (except its never their group or their rigid control mania that's the cause - it's always the other guy. Which is why 80s Conservatives tried to claim that Orwell would have voted for Reagan had he lived, while modern day peaceniks try to say that Bush pulling the same old lies that every politician pulls is somehow BIg Brother incarnate)

ANYHOW - not only did my professor LIKE the paper (it's rare that a professor likes a paper where you are writing about why his assigned reading is offal - but then again that's what marks a good professor vs. an indocrinating motherfucker in my mind) but he suggested that I delve into it a little further and submit it to a Peer Review Journal.

Blink.

Blink.

I'm shocked.

Especially since I'm getting an M.A. in English with a Creative Writing concentrate and have no plans of continuing the graduate school after I receive the MA. I mean if I get a literary criticism article published in a peer review journal (very big IF - and I might have to tone down the polemic against the Deconstructionists - they have sharp teeth and mean beady little eyes - and we can even call them fascists since they have no problem associating themselves with Nazi Boy WOnder Heidigger) I would actually have to think about getting a PhD.

I am trying to be a writer and small press publisher (Teddy Bear Cannibal Massacre on sale now!) not an English professor.

On the other hand, English professor would definitely pay the bills easier than "temporary worker tryin to support his writing and small press publishing careers".

It's a quandry.