Graham Harman has been posting some very useful advice for graduate students (and aspiring academic writers) here and here. The five “lessons” at the end of the first piece are especially useful.
To the third – “Write for the specific occasions that called for the writing” – I would add: and create those occasions when necessary, but don’t create too many of them. (I used to try to attend too many conferences, which is a temptation when one is doing the kind of interdisciplinary work that has no obvious home but many potential homes-away-from-home.) And to the fifth – “Keep reading new things, and write about them after you read about them” – this is very good practice, a kind of mental/intellectual hygiene, and it’s part of the reason why I started this blog. (On the other hand, getting free books in exchange for book reviews can be more expensive, in time spent, than it’s worth, since book reviews don’t get you far.) The point is to keep reading, keep thinking, keep talking, and make connections between your teaching and your reading/writing whenever possible.
One piece that could be expanded on: How much time should you spend editing, rewriting, and refining what you write? There’s an art to this, and my tendency has usually been to overdo it. But there’s a place for the definitive article or book (which takes a lot of time and work), and a place for the quickie. The dissertation, for instance, could become the first kind of thing (which is why it’s best to write it with a book in mind). But the same material can often be turned into different formats, and it’s all continual work in progress. So usually it’s better to err on the side of getting something done and off, getting it “in the pipeline” for publication, and moving on to something else while you wait to hear whether it’ll need more work or not.
I found this part particularly “useful for graduate students”:
“You have to avoid these people as if your life depended on it, because in some sense it does. It’s so easy to get dragged down into the whirlpool with these characters. If they attack you even faintly, counterattack as violently as needed to ensure that they never even think of crossing you again. In person I am as kind to animals as to people, but I do allow myself the liberty of extreme ferocity in dealing with the aggressive, sneering, bloodsucker type. They are my personal Axis of Evil, and I feel no compunction about laying waste to their villages whenever they strike first. It really is a matter of life and death that you do so. And the test is quite simple: what is your energy level like whenever you deal with various people? If you feel yourself happier and more energized with certain people, those are the ones you need to spend time with if you want to become more productive. With those who make you feel drained, and who constantly toss bitchy little darts in your direction (even if they’re difficult to “prove”) avoid those people, and when they come seeking you out to take a stab at you, knock them flat on the ground with as much force as needed so that they never come back. Feel no guilt about it: they do not wish you well. Your success ruins their alibi. Once in a blue moon I’ve been wrong about the nature of the person and have had to apologize and make it up to them. But generally, your instincts will be right.”
Wow, really? Lay waste to anyone who stands in your way, even if it’s something insignificant? Ferocity? Burning villages? I think in the US such as advice would get one in trouble (or at the very least, at the Dean’s office) – how can you endorse this sort of thing?
Frank – That paragraph certainly sounds incendiary, especially when taken out of its context (though I think he meant something more specific than “anyone who stands in your way”). My point, of course, wasn’t to endorse everything Graham wrote, just to point to it as a source of potentially useful observations and insights. I wish other philosophers would take the time to share their advice for grad students the way Graham does.
You’re probably right. It just sort of jumped at me (I don’t see how context helps in this case, the advice is pretty clear: lay waste to anyone who interferes with your work so that they think twice before they do it again) – certainly it’s wise to avoid those who are attempting to sabotage you, everyone knows those sorts of people, but to advice to hit them back with everything one has, especially advice graduate students without the safety of the tenured academic position is rather strange.
I do agree that more people should write about these sorts of things, but maybe they already do, only in privacy of email communication and personal conversations. Although it does seem that graduate students are more abandoned these days than when I went to school. Still, I think it’s best to steer clear from the language of such violence, however metaphorically it is meant.
I can relate to Herman because I’m a former newspaper writer so I have learned to write fast and under pressure. One bit of advice that I have found very helpful comes from Hemingway. He said to quit while you are ahead (I’m paraphrasing). What he was talking about is that when you are in the heat of writing, stop when you are at your peak. This might sound counter-intuitive, but what happens is that when you sit down for your next writing session you can tap right back into that creative force. There is a big danger of over-writing and draining your creativity in one shot. I see this often with my students who are writing large thesis papers for the first time. They get initially inspired and spend a week cranking our 20+ pages and then get stuck for a month. I always tell them to pace themselves. This has worked well for me, but I’m sure this is not good advice for everyone.