Comps, comps, comps!

I have been suddenly back to working on comps, and working hard, at that.  In the last 10 days, I've read 17 books, most of them for my dissertation adviser's list.  Three were on environmental history, but the rest have been about Spain, generally between 1875 and 1940. To keep things straight for me (and maybe even help later on), I'm going to list them and provide my own quick summary.  So feel free to stop reading if you are not interested in a bunch of Spanish history book summaries!

Stephen Pyne, Vestal Fire - shoot me now. While I'm sure there are interesting arguments here, this 600+ page book bored me to tears. Literally. I ended up reading a few reviews and the section on the Mediterranean and giving up after about 3 hours. Blah.

William A. Christian, Jr., Visionaries: The Spanish Republic and the Reign of Christ - unfortunately, like Pyne, this book is far too long (around 500 pages) and has no real argument. After I got through part of it, I read some reviews by three of the giants in the field (Lannon, Ringrose, and Payne), and none of them could find the argument. Lannon, in particular, ended his review with something along the lines of, "So, the retelling of the story is great, but I'm still left wondering - what does it mean?" Not a good sign when the giant who focuses on Catholicism and religion in Spain has no idea why your 500-page book on visions of Mary in 1931 in the Basque regions matters.

Diana K. Davis, Resurrecting the Granary of Rome: Environmental History and French Colonial Expansion in North Africa - Excellent work on the French use of a declensionist environmental narrative as a means of justifying the imposition of imperial rule over the Berbers and Arabs of the Maghreb.

Walter Rodney, How the West Underdeveloped Africa - I swear, he could have saved me a lot of time by just saying, "Read Marx. Now apply it to Africa and Europe and their relationship. The End." -.-

Temma Kaplan, Red City, Blue Period: Social Movements in Picasso's Barcelona - Excellent book that shows how, in Barcelona, festivals and street performances of various kinds were used both to express solidarity and to challenge the central authority in Madrid. These festivals and rituals were coopted and transformed over time by various groups (unions, women, the Church, the regionalist league, etc.) and together they helped shape Barcelona's unique identity in the early twentieth century.

Sheelagh Ellwood, Spanish Fascism in the Franco Era: Falange Espanola de las Jons, 1936-76 - I'm sure this is a good narrative history of the institution of the Falange Espanola, but it bored me. A lot. I got to where I didn't care what was happening to the FE at any point. Again, she's a good writer, and her work on Franco is always well-supported. But I don't like the Franco era. It bores me.

Michael Richards, A Time of Silence: Civil War and the Culture of Repression in Franco's Spain, 1936-1945 - Interesting idea - that the focus on "autarky" in the immediate aftermath of the civil war was not truly just about economics, but was actually part of a larger process of isolating Spaniards, "purifying" the nation of that "anti-Spain" crowd (aka, those who supported the Republic); and that poverty, self-denial, and hardship were all encouraged as your due sacrifice to the New State, which was continually reinforced by violence and the threat of violence.

Alun Kenwood, ed., The Spanish Civil War: A Cultural and Historical Reader - Primarily a primary source reader, but using literature to explore Spanish, American, French, British, and German experiences and reactions to the civil war. Fun read.

Helen Graham, The Spanish Republic at War, 1936-1939 - Very long book... and right now I can't remember what she argues. Probably because I couldn't find a real thesis statement anywhere... in the 500-page book!

Ronald Radosh, et al, eds., Spain Betrayed: the Soviet Union in the Spanish Civil War - Primarily a collection of around 80 Soviet documents, taking up most of 500 pages, regarding the Soviets' involvement in the war, the editors argue that the Soviets wanted, from the very beginning, to control he situation in Spain. They contend that the Soviets wanted to turn Spain into a version of what they'd use in Eastern Europe after WWII.

Gerald Howson, Arms for Spain: The Untold Story of the Spanish Civil War - Using primarily diplomatic records from around the world, Howson argued that the Non-Intervention Pact condemned the Republic to defeat, in part because, in practice, the Nationalists were able to get all they needed from Germany/Italy, and because the Republic was reduced to trying to smuggle arms in from around the world. In this smuggling scheme, they were taken advantage of by pretty much everyone, though the Soviets were especially ruthless in manipulating the exchange rates to obtain as much Spanish gold as possible. He also points to the general ineptitude of all of those involved as one explanation for the whole fiasco.

Pierre Broue and Emile Temime, The Revolution and the Civil War in Spain - A lovely little Marxist book that argues that there was a social revolution going on in Spain at the beginning of the Civil War, and that this Revolution was, in large part, the enthusiasm and lifeline for the Republic. They seem to think that The Revolution could have saved Spain, but that the Republican leaders, especially the communist party, sacrificed the Revolution in order to fight the war; by doing so, they ended up losing both the Revolution AND the war. Fun, huh?

Adrian Shubert, The Road to Revolution in Spain: The Coal Miners of Asturias, 1860-1934 - His doctoral dissertation from the 1980s, Shubert argued that the miners in Asturias who revolted in October 1934 had radicalized primarily due to the economic crisis in the industry after WWI and the inability of the unions or the Republic to solve the problems. The Spanish coal industry boomed during WWI, as British coal, especially, faltered during the fighting. But after 1918, the British industry rebounded, with the effect of sending the Spanish industry into a bit of a depression; Spanish mining companies responded by trying to cut wages and social provisions, instituting greater mechanization, and in general sacrificing working conditions for greater productivity and profits. The miners turned to their syndicate, the SMA, but it chose a route of moderation, relying on the government. When the government - both the Primo dictatorship and the later Republic - were unable to mitigate the effects of the depression, the miners radicalized even more. So when the Socialists sent the word for a general strike and uprising, the Asturian miners were especially ready.

Edward Malefakis, Agrarian Reform and Peasant Revolution in Spain - A bit of a beast to get through, mainly because endless tables and statistics kind of get boring after a few hours, Malefakis argued that it was the failure of the Republic to pass truly radical land reform between 1931 and 1936 that led to the radicalization of the Spanish peasant, especially in Southern Spain (i.e., Extremadura and Andalucia) where the latifundio system was so prevalent. By not addressing the land question, the Republic doomed itself.

Robert Kern, Liberals, Reformers and Caciques in Restoration Spain 1875-1909
*I never quite found an actual thesis... but he argues that the failure of Spanish liberalism to reform the agrarian situation and provide real relief to peasants and workers explains why liberalism as a political option failed after 1875. Because liberalism was so closely associated with the power of the caciques, especially since Canovas did not trust the general public to be true participants in government, and because of the crises after 1875 (the disaster of 1898, the Semana Tragica (which killed the possibility of regionalist reform), liberalism failed to adapt, reform, or modernize.

Pamela Radcliff, From Mobilization to Civil War: The Politics of Polarization in the Spanish City of Gijon, 1900-1937
*Her doctoral dissertation, this is an excellent work that uses both Habermas' concept of the public sphere and Gramsci's discussion of hegemony to argue that in the early twentieth century, there were three hegemonic projects competing for dominance. These were the republican project, the labor movement's project, and the traditional narrative (Catholic, monarchist, etc.). Dissension within the republican ranks, and the conflict between the UGT and CNT in the labor movement, helped prevent either side from fully winning over the working class - and so neither side was able to unify the masses under one coherent hegemonic project. They tried to co-opt the public sphere, through education, processions/festivals, rituals, symbols, but none of the hegemonic projects dominated. Again, the lack of real reform under the Republic of the 1930s doomed the republican project for good.

Gerald Brenan, The Spanish Labyrinth: an Account of the Social and Political Background of the Spanish Civil War
*Blech, this was my main project today. I finished with Radcliff around 11 a.m., and spent most of the rest of the day (when trying to work) reading this. After 300+ pages, I think the main argument of this 1940s work is that the agrarian problem (minifundia in the centre/north, latifundia in the south, regional diversity and constant struggle between peasants/workers and elites) was the primary factor dooming the Republic and leading to the war. There's a lot more in here, but I think this was the main contribution.

Ups and downs

I'm a little disappointed.  I've been grading short essays (2-3 pages) and quizzes for the last two weeks.  It was my students' first essay and second quiz. 

Class #1 - quiz average went from 77% on the first one up to 81% on the second one, and their paper average was 83%.  

Class #2 - quiz average went from 76% to 87%, and the paper average was 81%.  

Class #3 - quiz average went DOWN from 78% to 69%, and the paper average was only 76%.  

What's frustrating is that that third class is my favorite.  I love talking with them, they try really hard, and they are just fun to teach, in general.  And yet their grades are going down.... And I'm not terribly sure what to do for them. *sigh*

My (former) kids

When I was in high school, I had to do a certain amount of volunteer work for school. I think, as an honor's student, I needed to do something like 30 hours per semester. It was rarely a problem to reach the magic number, especially all the things I did through my church. But I wanted to do more than just the church events, and so I decided to talk with the County of Parks and Recreation and see if there were any possibilities there. 

It turned out that they had a program for autistic children ages 7-12 that met for about an hour and a half every Monday (or Tuesday) night. The idea was to give parents of autistic children a night off and, through games and crafts, work on the kids' motor skills, communication skills, and direction-following. I knew next to nothing about autism at that point, but I quickly learned a lot. I even read an autobiography of an autistic woman (Donna Williams, Nobody Nowhere: the Extraordinary Autobiography of an Autistic, 1994) and was thoroughly amazed at her experiences. I interviewed with two people - who were, I'm sure, a bit wary at first that a 14-year old could handle it all. But they quickly asked me to come on board. For three years, until the county eliminated the program, I went every week to help my kids.  

The kids would arrive around 6 p.m., and we'd immediately do some physical activity. We typically met at a school gym, and so they had balls and jump ropes, and we would do a lot of running/walking laps (to try to get them both active and following directions). After perhaps 30 minutes, we would then take a little break and give some snacks. Once snack time was over (usually 15-20 minutes later), we then did arts & crafts until their parents all arrived.  

As the only worker under the age of about 35, I was designated the one to catch the "runners." My favorite runner was a 10 or 11-year old girl named Mary. Mary was tall, almost as tall as me, and skinny. She couldn't have weighed more than about 70 lbs. She was nonverbal, though I'm convinced she understood more than she let on. Her favorite thing to do - anytime, anywhere - was run. We would try to sit down for snacks, and off she'd go. And I'd go after her, help her slow down, and try my best to bring her back to the table to join the others.  

Mary was just one of the kids who still have a special place in my heart. I don't remember all of their names anymore, though their faces are in my heart. One girl was very tall for her age - a good 4 or 5 inches taller than I was at the time - and decently verbal. The thing I remember most is taking her to the bathroom. She could do everything herself, but someone always had to take her. I remember that she would constantly be shaking her hands while we walked, and would talk the *entire* time. I would try so hard not to laugh while she was in the stall, because she would be telling me all sorts of things I didn't need to know. :-)  

Then there was this little red-head. I can see him, but his name is lost among a sea of students. He came my third year (the last year the program existed), and, boy did he make an entrance! Mary's sister often accompanied her to the program to give her parents a real night off. She was perhaps a year older than Mary, and a very pretty little girl. This little kid - and I do mean "little"; he was no more than 3 ft tall at the time - walked up to her and gave what we soon learned was his constant pick-up line: "You're pre--tty. Are you a Chris-tian?" (The "pretty" and "christian" were both drawn out and emphasized greatly.) The line changed every so often - "Your mommy's pretty. Is she a christian?" or "Mary's pretty. Is she a christian?" We laughed so much with this kid. His parents were, of course, mortified that their teeny 10-year old son was hitting on every female in sight. :-p  

There were others, of course. One boy who was moderately verbal; he could talk about his day, but he couldn't stand to be touched. He seemed to be in his own world through most of the day. Until we got to arts and crafts. This kid was an amazing artist. He could create the most amazing pictures, his crafts were always absolutely perfect (with no help from us), and he would sit and draw with perfect concentration until we made him leave with his parents. 

My favorite, though, and the one I loved most dearly, was a tiny big man named Artie. He was the oldest of the kids there - turning 13 or 14 by the time the program ended - and was completely nonverbal. He came up perhaps to my shoulders, and was at least twice my weight. He made two basic sounds - a siren noise when he was upset or angry or didn't want to do something, and he hummed when he was content or happy or enjoying himself. Because of his weight, he was our worst runner. Sometimes, when I was tired of running after Mary, I would slow down and walk with my arms around Artie. While we made our laps, I would talk to him the whole time. The other workers laughed that I talked to him like a regular kid. I supposed that I was too naive to treat them any differently from any other kids. I told Artie how much his parents loved him, how much I loved him, how much God loved him. Despite my coworkers' laughter, I talked to Artie every week, no matter what. After two and a half years of talking to Artie, one night something great happened. Everyone assumed that because he couldn't speak, he probably didn't understand much of what we said. So this night, he was playing somewhat dangerously on one of the posts that would hold up a volleyball net. He was walking in circles on the base, making it tilt dangerously. I yelled his name, said no, and then firmly took him by the hand and led him to the other side of the gym and gave him a ball to play with. He went straight back to the post. I said "no" again, and led him away again. He returned once again. This time I yelled his name, and he turned, looked straight at me, and gave this evil "heh heh heh" and went back to swinging. Everyone was shocked, because it was the first time he had ever shown that he understood exactly what it was that we didn't want him to do. Half laughing, half being firm, I told him no, told him he was a little stinker, and that now I was on to him, and made him leave the post a final time. I have never forgotten that little laugh.

I was watching a program tonight that included 5 autistic children (or at least autistic spectrum children), and thought, once again, about my former kids. It's been a long time now, and so those children are in their early 20s now. They'll always be in my heart. No matter how many students I have over the years, I think my heart will always be with that group of kids. I wish I had the time to work with kids like that now.

Maybe not right now, but hopefully soon I'll be able to give some of my time to those children. Remember, all children are special and deserve your best love. Some just tug at your heart strings a little more.

Here's to my kids.

Debating

Just a quick thought: In watching the presidential debates, I wonder if listening to political crap-speak is where my students learned the art of writing entire essays that say absolutely nothing.  

The only problem is that they admit to me that they don't watch debates, don't read or watch the news, and don't pay attention to what's going on in the world (outside of facebook, myspace, and twitter, at least).  

After the debate, I need to get back to my students' papers.  I'm almost done reading and commenting on one of my three classes' papers.  So far, I am not impressed. 

Slight detour

I'm so excited, I have to take a small detour from writing about teaching/grad school.  This morning I completed my first 20-mile bike ride!  

It took me 1 hour 33 minutes, my average speed was 12.9 mph.  

I'm so happy!!! 

Representing yourself

Sorry for the long post, but the migraine medicine is keeping me up against my will tonight.

After a bit more angst, I completely rewrote my personal statement for the Fulbright, slightly revised a few parts of my proposal, and turned the whole thing in today - one day earlier than the if-at-all-possible deadline, and 11 days earlier than the absolutely-last-day-possible deadline.  I still have to translate both items into Spanish - and if at all possible I want to have those done by next Wednesday.  I hope to have it done by Monday night or Tuesday morning, get a few native speakers to read over them and make sure I'm saying what I think I'm saying, make revisions, and turn it in on Wednesday. 

I probably am most concerned about the personal statement.  To be blunt, I had no idea what I was doing with it.  Last year, I was told to explain why I study Spain, why I love it, how I got there.  So I traced my journey to studying Spain through high school, college, and graduate school.  The only response I got - show us more about you loving Spain.  

So this year I wrote a new personal statement and tried to show my passion for the people, place, and histories.  I spent much more time talking about my time in Madrid in 2006.  The response I got - it's too "intellectual" and we want more of your biography.  

So I went back to the drawing board.  I started getting frustrated because people kept talking about sharing your story of how you overcame things to get where you are.  But, really, I don't have a come-from-behind story.  I'm more the tortoise in the story - slow and steady, moving up little by little, keeping an eye on the goal.  I don't have a bad home life - my parents are still together after 35 years, my grandparents have been married for 65 years, and my other grandparents were married 52 years before my grandfather passed away.  I always was a good student, had no learning disabilities, didn't live in bad neighborhoods, etc.  

I talked with one of the only people in the office who had applied for this grant, and we talked about how they want a little bit of everything: your family background, interests, intellectual biography, career goals, how you'll be an ambassador, etc.  She said something that I think helped lead to a breakthrough: "Remember that you are writing for the National Committee and the nation's committee.  They don't have the benefit of meeting you in person, so you need to try to get across who you are, your personality."  

With that piece of advice in mind, I decided to just write a brand new statement.  I thought about who I am as a person - if someone hadn't met me, how could I try to help them see *me*?  I came up with a few things: my family, my faith, my travels, my studies, and teaching.  So this time, I started out talking about my parents - their dedication and hard work, my dad's love of history, our history-based vacations (of which there were *many,* trust me!), and my dad quizzing me before history tests (and telling me more stories to make things more exciting).  Then I talked about my parents' encouragement for my brother and me to explore the world and give back - primarily in the US through our church and through missions work abroad.  To try to get in some of my "outside interests," I talked about how my fascination with history began infiltrating everything - so much so that I was even slightly distracted by the living history around me while singing in St. Giles' Cathedral in Edinburgh, or in the abbey on Iona, or at Stirling Castle - and so I chose to study history.  I actually only discussed why I study Spain in a few sentences, and then spoke about my goals as an educator, trying to explain why the Fulbright is vital for me as both a student and a teacher.  

I showed it to my advisor, who responded quite positively.  He thought that it did a good job of representing me as a person and not just a scholar.  Of course, I won't know until the last day in January if it gets me past the first round.  But I think my colleague's advice is the best I've ever received.  Hopefully it will serve me, and others, well. 

Listening

A note to all students: 

If you want a surefire way to confound, annoy, and generally anger your professors, there is only one thing to do: don't listen.  

I am constantly perplexed by my students.  Three weeks ago, I had to announce a major change on an assignment to my students.  The professor's syllabus was quite vague and ambiguous, and so the TAs decided to make the assignment much more focused.  We narrowed down their choice to one particular primary source and created a specific question they should answer for their essay (rather than trying to formulate an essay based on random discussion questions in their book).  I announced this change.  I wrote it on the board.  I reminded them the following week.  

Their paper is due in 48 hours, and I have received no less than twelve emails from students in the last 20 hours asking what they are supposed to be doing.  

Perhaps this is my own fatigue coming out, or my frustration that I am spending at least two days per week trying to figure out how to teach them what they need to know, but I do not want to answer these emails.  Here's how I see it: 

1) I gave them all the information they needed weeks ago. I write it out on the board, explained the entire thing, and specifically told them they should write this down.

2) They have had 19 days to ask about the paper if they did not do #1. 

3) Whether or not they act like it, they are adults.  It is their responsibility to obtain the information they need, and asking the instructor 48 hours before the paper is due - especially when I *know* that every one of these students was in class when I gave them the question - seems irresponsible.  How do I know that they were in class? Because the day that I explained all of this was the day they took their first quiz, and only 1 student still enrolled in my classes did not take the quiz.  

All of these combine with my own exhaustion to make me a not terribly accommodating professor this week.  They need to learn some responsibility, and they need to learn it fast. 

Speaking of these emails, I really wish someone would teach their kids how to write formal emails.  Did no one ever teach them that you should probably not write your professors using the same (bad) grammar as when you text your friends?  Some key faux pas in these latest emails: 

1) No salutation and no signature - which implies, respectively, that the student does not know either who I am or who they, themselves, are.  I actually told one student that I generally will not answer an email if I do not know to whom I am writing. 

2) The use of all lowercase letters

3) Confusing "your" and "you're"; "there" and "their"; and "cite" and "site"

Argh.  So my suggestions to students: Listen.  Pay attention.  Proofread.  Stop writing to me as if you are writing a text message or instant message.  And if you find yourself a day before a major assignment is due and you have not paid one bit of attention to me all semester, do not expect me to bend over backwards to tell you everything you need to know.  Be an adult; be responsible!