None of you are commenting upon my new name or helping me to mourn Mictlantecuhtli, which I miss and might have to resurrect one day. This was a poetry magazine at NIU that appears not to have lasted; it has an interesting article on Vallejo in the first number, despite poor bibliography (a situation which may have actually freed the author to think clearly).
I am trying to understand the poem my new name comes from and it is quite a job, and regrettably I am not impressed with this Vallejo archive. How many digital archives of Vallejo do you know of?
♦
In other news people like Guimarães (notice all the great essays on his site), while not joining those who say Brazil does not have racism because it has racial motility, still seem strangely obsessed with the idea that complex systems of determining color are a separate topic, not necessarily related to racist practice even when they essentialize or naturalize identities based on [phenotype]. For instance:
Eis como Howard Winant define o racismo:
(1) práticas simbólicas que essencializam ou naturalizam identidades humanas baseadas em categorias ou conceitos raciais; (2) ação social que produz uma alocação injusta de recursos sociais valiosos, baseada em tais significações; (3) estrutura social que reproduz tais alocações. (Winant, 2001, p. 317)
Ou seja, sob o rótulo de racismo, são tratados objetos tão distintos quanto os sistemas de classificação racial, o preconceito racial ou de cor, as formas de carisma (para usar o conceito de Elias), que podem ser observadas em diversas instituições e comunidades, a discriminação racial nos mais distintos mercados, e as desigualdades raciais e sua reprodução.
So, he would not say that all these things are aspects, faces, or building blocks of [racism]. And I do not understand why it is so [threatening?] to say that racism is a complex phenomenon made of multiple, interconnected elements.
(What are all the pedantic explanations about race and color in which some Brazilian scholars engage really about, anyway? How many times must I be told there are ألف or one thousand names of colors, and that these categories are flexible and permeable, before people will believe I know these things? Also, how much does it really matter whether the two elevators are marked “white” and “colored” or “social” and “service,” if everyone knows who is to enter which one?)
♦
It is common in Brazil to say foreigners misinterpret the Brazilian system of racial classification and therefore also misread racism in Brazil. I would say these are two different things and do not necessarily follow from each other.
Axé.
coldhearted scientist وداد 
Some of us were at work all day yesterday, and I try not to comment on blogs from work. But I did notice the name change, and the announcement, and the shift in emphasis.
Was your praise of The Compleat Academic tongue-in-cheek? That book’s message seems so counter to your values.
Counter to my values, how so? It is the only advice book I have found that seems to fit my values — they are serious, not resentful or fearful, and they don’t condescend to the reader, and they have really good practical things to say. They do talk about keeping priorities straight, but they don’t go on about “cutting corners” or leading rigid lives. Have I missed something?
I noticed the name change too, but didn’t know what to say. It is slightly more pronounceable.
It is only transitory — not the permanent new name. I am having difficulty finding one I have not already used or that does not seem hackneyed or that does not look funny on the page.
“In a foolhardy burst of enthusiasm, altruism, and spinelessness, one of the authors spent a year working with nineteen students. . . . causing nightmares of hordes of students swarming through home and office” (51-2).
And now I seem to have reached my limit for viewing pages from the book, so I can’t quote further, but when I was looking at it yesterday it appeared to give a great deal of the corner-cutting type of advice that you deplore. Don’t spend too much time on class preparation, don’t invest in the institution by doing admin work, that sort of thing.
It doesn’t use the disgusting term “cut corners” and it does not whip you with empty requirements to speed faster and faster and get more superficial at every turn.
It does not assume you are stupid or incompetent.
It does not recommend irresponsibility or disrespect for any part of the job, and it gives really concrete practical advice rather than spout platitudes. It does not say the answer to everything is rushing and putting out mere writing as opposed to research.
It doesn’t recommend repressing yourself.
It is a serious book, not a condescending book. It is for real professors, not for people who want to pretend to be professors or to survive in academia despite being better suited for high school.
Remember, I do not deplore effiency in and of itself. I do deplore taking the pleasure out of things and the opportunities for learning, taking the meaning out. (Remember, I was raised by nihilists.) Mostly I deplore barking save time! and just write! when people have more specific questions than that.