https://thebaffler.com/latest/accid ental-elitism-alvarez B

>>9961789

>Yet still /lit/ will claim humanities academia is worthwhile
aka you barely lurk /lit/

>>9961789
> phoneposting

There's a stop sign on my captcha.

>Article is the average length of a NYer article.
>Pretentiously long.

stop posting here

OP you sound like a retard with a turd coming out of butt that he can't break off because his short arms ca;n't reach his ass because he's fat and he's too tired to push it out because he's fat and lazy so he posts some garbage on MY BOARD to piss off the libs but he gets dragged for being a retard

>>9961910

Leftypol pls

File: Screen Shot 2017-08-31 at 11.11.05 pm.png (192KB, 1495x455px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 1495x455px

This was good desu.

Holy kek the guy who wrote this has a nice vocabulary and all, but he's writing overly verbose sentences while half-arguing(?) that academics need to stop using jargon and being pretentious. This whole essay is pretentious, insecure and hypocritical.

So the point of the argument, basically, is: academics are pretentious elitists who use overly verbose and jargon-filled language in their research. It is largely unnecessary and done as a means to increase the barriers to entry or make it more 'high-brow'. Because academics do this shit, the average joe doesn't understand what they're saying, so they distrust and resent them. The academic continues to refuse to 'translate their work' into lay mans terms and just stop being elitists because they think it lessens the value of their work or standing in their circles.

This article is verbose display of thesaurus-perusing social commentary, and it could be considerably shorter and less wordy. Like I said, its great writing and all (aside from a couple of spelling errors), but its like its trying too hard to be high-brow and long-winded when the point they're trying to make is not very difficult to convey in the first place.

Also the solutions are made out like they're noble endeavours for academics to pursue, when really "talking to the people" and "engaging with the public, the communities, etc in various mediums" is pretty basic stuff, already done by these academics. Its awfully condescending to the non-academic crowd and it does nothing to not make me think the author is one of the elitist academics he's trying to critique.

>>9961789
>Yet still /lit/ will claim humanities academia is worthwhile
/lit/ shits on humanities academia all the time dude.

>>9962247
academia jargon is not only why people distrust academia (even some university students hate academia as an institution) it's because most of the time they do nothing but self agrandizing masturbation and circlejerking defining what is valid and what it's not

for example, if you do a research paper on uni and try to use sources outside of the people the academia deems worthy you are ridiculed, for example I once made a paper on tribalism using biology and neuroscience for one of my International relations theory courses and the teacher said it was wrong because I didn't use "academic" sources when I used peer reviewed papers and articles written by biologists, neuroscientists, philosophy and sociology but since the wasn't no known "Internationalists" there it was wrong

Humanities academia is full of pretentious fucks

>>9962141
that wordplay is about as impressive as a kindergarteners book report, i wouldnt call it verbose.

>>9961789

>>9962141
>something used *by* tools
damn

>>9962467
>Self-aggrandizing.

>>9962571
>**That was the word I was after

>>9962571
sorry man my keyboard is shitty and sometimes it doesn't register, I need to change this shit