THE CURIOUS INDEX, 1/6/2011

But that very same scenario has been floated by a lot of people recently, without even a hint of understanding that what they’re suggesting is the exact system the NFL operates under.

Maybe I didn’t pick up on the sarcasm (I’ve been up for nearly 6 hours already, cut me some slack)

A stipend would be equal no matter how good the player is. Besides, most athletic scholarships involve a monthly stipend.

NCAA football players are handsomely compensated, up to 6 figures in the case of some private schools. Not to mention the networking opportunities that pay off later in life that the regulart students don’t have

It’s not the NCAAs job to find additional ways to compensate players that are too short sighted to take advantage of the great compensation they are already receiving.

Shirts, commercials, etc.

A.A. Stagg is impressed.

…was ever bragging about a high APR ranking, which is a silly way to rank anything.

As was demonstrated, Auburn didn’t “DO” anything to help anyone “skate”. The university had crip courses and students (athletic and non-athletic) found them. That was the extent of the “scandal”. From an Athl. Dept. stand point, nothing improper occurred. No was steered and nothing was orchestrated.

It was a mild embarrassment for the university since those kinds of classes were exposed. But they exist just about everywhere, and will continue to do so. We’ve probably still got them, as does [INSERT NAME OF YOUR FAVORITE SCHOOL].

ND has the best graduation rate among NCAA D1 Football teams at 94%. Having gone to tough classes with football players, I know in my heart that we don’t inflate those numbers.

Sometimes we have to remember that these are kids, and the vast majority of them will not become rich pro athletes. Letting a kid “skate” does a disservice to the kid and eventually as the Auburn story shows, it comes back to bite you in tail.

Personal IQ now -2.

Get yourself a nice little cottage out on Lake murray and write.

Captain Lou Albano!

didn’t mean for that.

Was free associating my thoughts there and clicked post instead of preview. Meant to delete everything after I would argue that it does.

I’ve been spending too much time debating the whole “Nazi imagery in MMA fashion” thing that’s been raging and got stuck on the thought.

I apologize.

Think about how people recoil in horror at the use of that word now. I think the use of the word gives the book essential context for today’s readers, and demonstrates just how unusual it would have been at that time for a white person to have a meaningful friendship with a black person. “Slave,” while an accurate description of the attitude of most whites toward blacks at that time, doesn’t have the derogatory and jarring effect of all the context behind “nigger.” Huck and Jim lived in a world where people regularly used that word with intense hatred and derision behind it, and nobody thought twice. Substituting “slave” just doesn’t pack the punch that I think is essential to an understanding of Huck and Jim’s relationship.

that you seem to believe you are capable of discerning my motivations for opposing the revision. It is essentially, ’I’m sorry for letting you know what I was thinking.’

Slave does not carry the same force as the N word, or the professor would not be calling for this change in the first place. The word “slave” typically carries much greater weight for a 25 year old with a full understanding of the true dehumanizing nature of the slave trade than a college freshman or HS student, for who it is just something out of a history book. It does not carry anywhere near the same force for students as the N word, something many students have encountered either first or second hand.

An effective educator will tell the students it is good that they are offended by the N word. They are supposed to be offended by the N word. The students should then be engaged in a dialogue as to why the author chooses to use the word so freely. The instructor needs to be confident enough to handle all the likely responses while still retaining the ability to guide the on-going discussion towards an ultimate recognition of the work as a scathing critique of both the institution of slavery, American race relations of the author’s day, leaving the students to decide for themselves whether or not America has reached Huck’s commitment to literally prefer he go to Hell than deny Jim’s full and equal humanity.

But then again, I’m from a ethnically diverse multi-cultural community and I have taken part in such discussions as a student and led them as a teacher, so I probably have a different perspective than someone from Wisconsin.

into a “pick your own adventure/slur” type structure. I loved those books in Jr. High.

I had to read many “literature” books while I was in HS (yeah, for being an enginerd and testing out of frosh English for college). There were some students who were offended by the text. But no matter what it’s about context. The author(s) wrote their words, with the meaning inflicted. All it takes is stopping and engaging the brain before doing something or say something meaningless.

She told me last night that she thinks it is the funniest book she has ever read and she it totally enjoying it. She had not heard anything about the revised edition “controversy”.

Huck Finn is a critique of American race relations, and anyone who cannot effectively convey that message to a classroom has no business teaching.

This revision is a lazy way out for lazy educators, and I stand by my claim that the department head should tell the prof he/she is in the wrong profession.

The modern version essentially simplified it for you. (hello cliffsnotes) You could have still liked them and read ALL of them, it may have just taken you longer to figure out. People want shit the simple easy way. No one wants to try to figure things out anymore.

My father (also an enginerd), told me the best thing about being an engineer is being taught how to think and solve problems. I have to agree. I don’t have to know one damn thing about what I’m doing tomorrow, but I learned how to figure it out.

Same goes with literature. If the only answer you’re looking for is a happy ending, or meteors blowing up, aren’t you missing half the references? It’s not always about the pro/antagonist. Like I said above, it’s context. And history and politics, and world culture.
/endrant

3 time outs, 14 seconds, settled for a field goal, didn’t use one time out. Got to get TD’s when you are that close.

Water World’s problems were caused by some unknown catastrophe. In Idiocrasy, we bring them on ourselves — which we seem to be doing really really well right now.

NOW SHUT UP IM BATIN’!!!

/that is almost always true, i’ve found

willis’ character sees himself die as a child. so he is in some sort of endless loop (Groundhog Day-ish) where he lives his life over & over, is aware of it, but cant change anything.