Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Natalie's avatar

This is such an important topic, thank you for writing this! I just finished my PhD last spring (Early Modern European history, women & gender) and managed to do all the things to make my CV competitive - the presentations and grants and distinction, a pub forthcoming, plenty of encouraging comments from my advisors. A job cycle later, no interviews or prospects to show for it.

I don’t regret doing the PhD, because I’m obsessed with the work itself and feel so lucky to have devoted a chunk of my life to it. But I’m glad to see you’re considering potential routes out of academia for when you reach the other side - as much as academics don’t want to talk about it, it’s essential to be prepared to continue the work in a different way. I’m only now starting to chart a path forward as an independent scholar, and I too am finding so much inspiration and a glimmer of hope from the Substack community.

I appreciate this post so much. Just because there’s not nearly enough academic jobs doesn’t mean that our continued research will be any less valuable.

Expand full comment
Elissa's avatar

Thank you so much for this! I’m a Victorianist/19th century person (British and American lit) and I have been working at an academic library as a marketing specialist, which I recommend because it gives me access to databases and books. It’s a great place to be because even when my job is boring, I can escape to the stacks for a minute and find something great to read.

But I really appreciate your take, because it is one I have thought of many times. Many well-intentioned writers about this topic just approach it as an individual problem rooted in the genre of melodrama (the sad stories of people who couldn’t live out their dreams!), but the way you approach it here is more an institutional problem, which is the way I think we should look at it. The reality is that when many, many individuals are not getting jobs in the humanities, well, that adds up to those fields kinda dying, as you point out. And it also means that many of the ways we treat scholars don’t make any sense for the vast majority of people doing scholarly work. Essentially, we have a system that works well for like 3 people, and the rest of us just have to kind of pretend that we are no different from those 3 people or risk not being welcomed into those spaces. What would it mean for conferences and professional societies to run as if everyone at them/in them did not have institutional affiliations? What would it mean for scholarly publishing to start grappling with that reality? A recent example I have of this is how I was doing reviewing work for an award as part of a scholarly society I’m in. Those of us doing the reviews are a mix of tenure track and non-academic folks, but the committee structure still kind of assumes that we all have the time and access to read five monographs in a couple weeks and review them. This is not to mention the fact that I contemplating giving awards to people who are doing what I cannot find the time to do—write a book. It feels a bit like working at a restaurant I can’t afford to eat at! Anyway, I appreciate your take to no end! It is just nice to see some acknowledging the realities here!!

Expand full comment
26 more comments...

No posts