Thread by @TenuredRadical

Thanks to the #GovernmentShutdown it took a while to get the comments for my (once again failed) application to the @NEHgov for my book. Some thoughts: (thread)

I am very grateful to the people who volunteer to do this job. It's a great kindness to participate in giving away money to OTHER PEOPLE to do their work, thus sacrificing their own time. I am sincere about that. Even to those of you who found my project unworthy.

That said, People who evaluate my scholarship seem to fall into two categories: those who really seem to love it, and think I am innovative and interesting, and those who think I should go sell real estate for a living. This phenomenon has affected me my whole career.

It has happened so many times that I have to think it is something about me, not about "them." But I lack clarity on what exactly that thing about me is -- or whether it is worth addressing. When I got readers' reports for my first book....

Reader #1 (ok, it was Alan Brinkley) was very enthusiastic, gave lots of helpful suggestions, and was generally very positive about the whole thing. Reader #2, whose name will be withheld because the point of this thread is not sh!tting on people, was all like:

"GROSS!!!! This is such a terrible book I cannot even believe you sent it to me!!!!!" Or words to that effect. Which was ever so mildly shattering, but my mentors pasted me back together, and the book has more or less been considered a welcome contribution to its field.

I once wrote an article that was rejected *four* different places. At one, i was told to revise and resubmit, and I did -- following the instructions with care -- and six months later, they were like, NOPE.

I almost threw that article away, and then a colleague said: "Send it to my friend X at Y journal," and I did, and he wrote back: "OMG! THIS ARTICLE IS SO GREAT I AM GOING TO PUBLISH IT IMMEDIATELY - THANK GOD IT CAME BEFORE I SENT THE JOURNAL OFF TO PRESS!"

Which was lovely. And then it won a prize! So you see what I mean? People see my work very different ways, depending on some *thing* that I cannot put my finger on.

Back to the @NEHgov (about which I am currently feeling very Nixonian -- "you aren't going to have Tenured Radical to kick around anymore! No sirree!") there were like eight readers. Half the readers found my proposal "Excellent"and half found it mediocre in various ways.

I also found it interesting that no one changed their evaluation as a result of the discussion: I mean, I guess if they had I would have gotten the grant, right? But the ones who thought it was excellent didn't change either.

I imagine it went kinda like this:

Weirdly, some passages from the reviews were deleted, and I am not sure why, unless these people had some really awful things to say about me that even made the @NEHgov program officer weep. In which case, I am glad they did.

But here is the lesson for everyone. I do detect suspicion, from those who thought the proposal was mediocre, about historians writing about the recent past, even though sociologists, journalists, anthropologists and others seem to have license to do that. Which is weird.

A significant number of historians really don't think its a worthy project unless it is presented in a highly academic writing style. Whereas half the readers totally got it, half seemed puzzled that I had had as much success as I had had, so little did they like my writing.

So that is all. I think I am ready to say, at the age of 60, that I will not crack the nut of an @NEHgov fellowship in my lifetime. Again, thank you to everyone who has read my applications over the years: I really mean that. And goodbye!

@threadreaderapp unroll