Real Men Don’t Get Tenure
As someone who wasted a few years of his life teaching in undistinguished academic institutions, I could never figure out why Hollywood would bother making movies about college professors and why anyone would want to spend his time or money watching for two hours a disheveled and grumpy middle aged man, portrayed as a misogynist and a misanthropic, trying to overcome his writer’s block while forcing himself on his female (and occasionally, male) students. Like who cares?
But who knows? Perhaps after getting tenured and spending the rest of my life teaching illiterate and apathetic kids about the same esoteric and boring subjects year after year after year, writing articles and books that no one reads, and being surrounded during long faculty meetings (where, as Dr. K. once noted, the fights are so bloody because the stakes are so small) by obnoxious and emasculating feminists and lefty guys with beards and/or pony tales, I would also have probably lost my own lust for life, or my so-called “life.”
After all, most college professors—and I’m talking here about the humanities and social science departments—recognize that unlike janitors, hairdressers and personal trainers, no one really needs their services. Students sign up for classes in political “science” (which is what I was teaching) or Shakespeare, because they tend to be painless and inflated with a lot of “A’s.” If you really wanted to study French lit or American history, all you had to do is pick up a few good books in the library and read them. You certainly didn’t t have to force your divorced father, burdened with a huge alimony and a new wife, to pay $$$ (I’m not sure what’s the cost of a “credit” is these days) and to listen to an unkempt and bearded grump (don’t these guys get paid enough to join a gym or visit the dentist?) read his notes for the thousandth time.
In short, there are Alpha Males—and then there are college professors who wake up late in life in their cluttered office, as they wait for another student to knock on the door and ask them for an extension on their paper, finding out that all they have to show for their efforts is their tenured position. Isn’t that exciting?
Not really, as we have discovered in a several recent movies about, yes, disheveled and grumpy middle aged men, trying to overcome his writer’s block, like the professor played by Jeff Daniels in “The Squid and the Whale” or the one that Philip Seymour Hoffman plays in “The Savages”. And then there was Michael Douglas in the role of the bearded professor who teaches English lit at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh in “Wonder Boys,” and now there is Dennis Quaid in the role of the bearded professor who teaches English lit at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh in the new film, “Smart People.” (What’s the deal with Carnegie Mellon University? My guess: the relatively low costs of making films in Pittsburgh)
That’s a great title for film critics, like “if you’re smart, don’t go to see ‘Smart People’.” Well, here is mine: A boring film about Boring and Unpleasant People, led by Quaid’s Lawrence Wetherhold, and including his teenage daughter, Vanessa, played by Ellen Page (straight from Juno; here she his using Yuppie slang instead of teenage lingo); his loser “adopted brother”—as our hero reminds us again and again—“Chuck” (Thomas Haden Church from “Sideways”), who is chaufering his injured brother around (in exchange a roof over his head); and in her worst movie part ever (and she had many), Sarah Jessica Parker (no sex and no city here), as Janet, a bitchy ER physician who once had taken a class with Wetherhold and still has a crush on her not so Mr. Big, who has been widowed for a quite a while. There is also Wetherhold’s metro-sexual son who is sleeping with his dad’s research assistant and some other shallow characters one encounters in academic milieus. And the film was directed by Noam Murro (never heard of the guy) and written by Mark Poirier, the author of the best-seller novel Goats (which I’ve read—not!)
“Smart People” seems to be drowning in beaten-up clichés and sophomoric jokes. First, there is Wetherhold as the cinematic archetype of the college professor who cannot get his book published, And then there is Vanessa, an overachieving Young Republican (she has a big poster of Reagan in her room) who admires, well, Dick Cheney, and who is studying a lot and gets a perfect score on her SAT, which is another way of telling us that she is cold and calculating. A Republican Stratford Daughter, if you will. And–horror of horrors!–she is a virgin, except for her infatuation with the Dick Cheney, that is. We are supposed to buy into the notion that behind the facades of the old and young Wetherhold hide warm and wonderful human beings that are just waiting to come out of their exterior shells, because, you know, deep down, they are good enough, they are smart enough, and, doggonit, people like them!
The media for these remarkable personal and intellectual transformations are “Chuck” and Janet. “Chuck” takes Vanessa to a bar, where she gets drunk, makes a fool of herself, smokes dope, and gets a bit slutty, which are (I suppose) the first steps on the road towards recovery from elitism to the love of humanity. At the same time, “Chuck” encourages his emotionally retarded brother to get a life while Janet teaches him to use a condom during not very arousing sex scenes. But he fails in that exam, and oops… they have twins. And the professor even gets to sell his book, You Can’t Read, to some publisher in New York, while his son’s poem is accepted by the New Yorker.
Where is Liz Taylor and Richard Burton when you need them? Buy or rent “Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf?” (which is based on a play by Edward Albee) a great film in which a bunch of professors meet and have a few heated arguments about this and that, and play such “games” as “Humiliate the Host,” “Get the Guests,” “Hump the Hostess” and “Bringing Up Baby.” Compare Burton who plays George, a history professor, and Liz as his wife, Martha, to Dennis Quaid and Sarah Jessica Parker in “Smart People.”
And remember what Gloria Swanson playing Norma Desmond says in Sunset Boulevard: “I am big. It’s the pictures that got small!” “Smart People” demonstrates that the scripts, the actors, and the movies are so small and insignificant these days.
I agree with one of our best screenwriters, David Mamet that part of the problem lies with the writers. Here is what Mamet had to say on the subject in a June 2008 issue of GQ:
Y’know, I grew up in a different generation. I grew up after World War II, and boys did different things in those days. You went camping. You went hunting. You boxed. And the image of a writer, to someone starting off in those days was not some schmuck who went to graduate school. It was Jack London, Nelson Algren, Ernest Hemingway. Especially coming from Chicago—a writer was a knock-around guy. Someone who got a job as a reporter or drove a cab. I think the reason there are a lot of novels about How Mean My Mother Was to Me and all that shit is because the writers may have learned something called ‘technique,’ but they’ve neglected to have a life. What the fuck are they gonna write about?”
Indeed, as Alex Pappademas who conducted the interview with Mamet pointed out, Mamet has “captured the dark side of the modern male mind—a place simmering with misogyny, greed, lust, and violence.” It’s a world where Alpha Males—and not girlie professors—do a lot of fighting in noir urban settings, marking their territory as they jockey for power and wrestle for control over other men and women, which is what they do in his latest film which Mamet—who announced recently that he was “No Longer a ‘Brain-Dead Liberal’—wrote and directed, “Redbelt.”
In the movie, a cross between “Night and the City” and “The Seven Samurai,” Mike, a Brazilian jujitsu instructor who runs a small martial arts academy in Los Angeles, a role played by Chiwetel Ejiofor, is a fighter and man of honor, a Knight or a Samurai, who never fights for profit. But he is backed into a corner as a result of a complex con job (a common theme in Mamet’s films) and is forced to violate his personal ethics in order to save his business and marriage and protect his friends while maintaining his integrity and sense of pride. It’s not a movie about the so-called lives of our college professors—which is one reason that I liked it.
Comments
I’d like to see a movie about a bad-ass professor who has a pair and isn’t afraid to
stand up for the truth. It could be about Professor Kevin MacDonald, Professor Richard
Lynn, or the good Professor Gottfried. Such men display great courage in this day and
age of soft totalitarianism.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
I’d like to see a movie about a bad-ass professor who has a pair and isn’t afraid to
stand up for the truth. It could be about Professor Kevin MacDonald, Professor Richard
Lynn, or the good Professor Gottfried. Such men display great courage in this day and
age of soft totalitarianism.
I sometimes wonder what psychological traits differentiate these men from your typical queer studies or even law professor with all the right opinions. I imagine men like Rushton, McDonald, Michael Levin, etc (Gottfried is only second tier bad ass) walking with their heads held higher, looking people more directly in the eyes, being more attractive to women and sleeping much easier at night.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
Very good review, and very perceptive quote by Mamet.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
Well, that hit home! I am close to finishing a Ph.D. in philosophy and I agree that this is an accurate portrayal of academia. There comes a time when you are trying to explain Descartes’ distinction between formal and objective reality to Hotel and Restaurant Management majors that you ask yourself: “what the hell am I doing?”. Perhaps it’s time to leave and get a “real job"--philosophers are in demand, aren’t they?
Click to flag this comment as abusive
“Very good review, and very perceptive quote by Mamet.”
I agree - and let’s not forget the very perceptive comments by gloria and Dmytro.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
I would be curious to know what Prof. Gottfried would say about choosing an academic career knowing what he now knows and given the current state of the average university. Would you pursue an academic career or follow a different path?
Click to flag this comment as abusive
This makes me think of John Forbes Nash, maybe because of the Carnegie Mellon connection....or maybe its the skitzo thing inherent in movies like this. Also I dont find dysfunctional families funny even if they are ‘smart’
Click to flag this comment as abusive
David Mamet was quoted: “Y’know, I grew up in a different generation. I grew up after World War II, and boys did different things in those days. You went camping. You went hunting. You boxed. And the image of a writer, to someone starting off in those days was not some schmuck who went to graduate school. It was Jack London, Nelson Algren, Ernest Hemingway. Especially coming from Chicago—a writer was a knock-around guy. Someone who got a job as a reporter or drove a cab. I think the reason there are a lot of novels about How Mean My Mother Was to Me and all that shit is because the writers may have learned something called ‘technique,’ but they’ve neglected to have a life. What the fuck are they gonna write about?”
Mamet left one thing out. Himself being a real man, his style, ducked the draft and left the fighting to others. Lately he has changed his mind. One must assume concern for Israel did that. Perhaps he could now enlist for a worthy ally and allow somebody else to stay home.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
I worked in a “support position” at a major university for over 17 years, and love movies about college professors. While I find Henry Kissinger repulsive in most ways, he was absolutely correct when he said that the politics of academia are so vicious because the stakes are so small (or thereabouts.)
It never ceased to amaze me the things faculties fight about. And there was no pettiness too petty. One professor, who was actually pretty un-PC and loved by the students and hated by the faculty because he was a prolific researcher and not a “team player (ie, he didn’t socialize with them), would crank out 30 page single-spaced memos to the faculty about their puny faults--professor by professor. Some was spot-on, but most of it--who cares? I understood his frustration, but what’s the point?
I’ve never understood why a college degree is a prerequisite for many jobs. (I have 2 1/2 degrees myself, but for the fun of it). And the ante keeps going up. At the university at which I worked, one of the job requirements for campus mail carriers and furniture movers was a BA! WTF???? In the early 1990s nearly a quarter of the secretarial staff had an undergraduate degree, a good number Masters, and some PhDs. Some places around town want a waiter with a degree.
This is what the education industry has sold to status conscious consumers. Your kid needs a college education, when in fact your kid can learn more on the street, on the job, and in the library. on her or his own and could make a decent living if the education industry would just shut up.
BTW, a great comment from Mamet--who btw, graduated from Yale Drama School. Back in the old days, one could knock-about. Now, those of us who do are considered “not living up to our potential.” Of what? How I long for the return of The Writer.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
I second what Gloria said. I consider Dr. Gottfried 1st tier all the way. I don’t even know who MacDonald and Levin are but I figure if they are worth knowing then they post on Takimag.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
Thanks for the kind comments. And Gloria, I’ll be seeing Dr. Gottfried next week, so I’ll try to find out whether he has “a pair.”
Click to flag this comment as abusive
All too true! Those of us who know how “tolerant” and “open” our universities are remain unsurprised that great conservative men like Russell Kirk were never offered decent jobs at the most prestigious schools, whose professors teach the dreary resentful stew that constituted Michelle Obama’s honors thesis. (It’s just as well; Mecosta has more real life to it than Princeton.)
Click to flag this comment as abusive
What is it that brings Alpha Males to their knees? The paleo and libertarian camps seem to admire alpha “jockeying for power” yet simultaneosuly tend to support cultures and traditions that are all about containing such alpha impulses.
Mamet meets Gottfried and then what? Is it forever the endless “marking of territory” whether in academia or the real world.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
Jim the contradiction that you may be seeing is a misunderstanding of what a paleo sees as manly. A paleo sees a man shouldering his responsibility to family and church/synogogue as manly not attacking foreign nations to spread democracy and equality. I find the later cowardly not manly, especially since it is usually someone else sent to do the killing.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
If the only book Professor Gottfried had written was “Multiculturalism and the Politics
of Guilt”, I’d declare him a true culture warrior. That he continues to defend genuine
conservatism, review controversial books by controversial authors, and attend
controversial conferences leaves no doubt in my mind that he possesses a pair!
As a 35 year old single woman still recovering from a university “education” I have
great esteem for anyone who battles against cultural Marxism. I know all too well of the
power the intellectual elite has to effect good or evil in a society.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
“...lefty guys with beards...”
What a terrible cliche, the bearded sissy. Beards aren’t or certainly weren’t always considered ‘lefty.’ Tell that to all of those ultra-conservative Muslims and Jews and they’ll laugh at you.
In fact, I can’t really think of an act more emasculating/feminizing that modern men engage in than shaving every day.
I also fail to see what is so ‘righty’ and ‘conservative’ about baby-faced corporate or political lackeys?
Click to flag this comment as abusive
NC,
“In fact, I can’t really think of an act more emasculating/feminizing that modern men engage in than shaving every day.”
Most Romans of the Republic shaved “every day.” It was only in the later Imperial times that you see the Roman aristocracy bearded. The early Roman republicans were virile and manly, not effete.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
In fact, I can’t really think of an act more emasculating/feminizing that modern men engage in than shaving every day.
One should focus the critique on the rise of the metrosexuals instead.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
“forced to violate his personal ethics in order to save his business and marriage and protect his friends while maintaining his integrity and sense of pride.”
What ... movie did you watch?! .... overcame that ... bro. No matter what hold, there’s always a way out. I don’t teach people how to fight, I teach people how to prevail.
Or were you out getting your ... fat on soda and popcorn? Taki where the ... are you?
What the ... are you talking about? Explain how and when he violated his ethics --or any ethics, especially with regard to the defense of --SPOILER ALERT!!!—“renunciation.”
Click to flag this comment as abusive
Spoiler Alert!
Explain how and when he violated his ethics --or any ethics.
How about fighting for money?
Click to flag this comment as abusive
When all is said, it’s clear that our civilizaton is dying (a victim of modernity) and in need of an emergency operation, but one of the necessary specialists is an incompetent drunk (viz., University Education).
Click to flag this comment as abusive
SPOILER ALERT:
When did he fight for money? He AGREED to fight for money, THEN RENUNCIATED. THEN he destroyed the whole charade, fighting for his honor, for his principles. And in such a dramatic fashion that all the others --the Japanese with his ancient family belt, and the Brazilian grand old master with his redbelt, SURRENDERED their belts to him, in public, bowing to him.
Honestly, do you think the check, if any, was tendered? Deposited? Cleared. The deal was to fight for a $50,000 purse, a reward for winning. There was no mention of guaranteed money; no mention of a signing bonus, no evidence in the film itself whatsoever of him GETTING ANY MONEY beforehand. And, since the round-robbin tournament didn’t take place, and, as far as I’m concerned, was never going to take place after what he did, neither he nor ANYONE fulfilled the executory contract.
Look, it was as if he got put into a corner and agreed to murder someone, but at the last moment before committing an overt act that would make him criminally liable, he destroyed the conspiracy in such a way that the other conspirators immediately got on their knees and asked for a priest to take their confession.
At least that’s the movie I saw. I could be wrong. It’s Mamet. Maybe the man with all the belts at the end of the movie with all the bad guys bowing to him didn’t really repent, hadn’t really found a way out of his moral predicament, didn’t really break the hold the bad guys had on him. Excuse me if I’m a bit trollish here, but that’s the best movie I’ve seen in a long time.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
Re-reading my post from last night, please accept my apologies for abusive language.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
No need for apologies. I love Mamet’s films, as I think I make clear in my post. I actually find it difficult to review thrillers/mysteries in which the final scenes are—surprise! surprise!—critical to the plot. I suppose that instead of writing that he was “forced to violate his personal ethics” I should have written that he was “forced into a situation in which he is being forced to choose between operating according his personal ethical codes and taking care of his loved ones.” As you point out, that tension is resolved at the end of the film.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
I bow to you.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
Mr. Hadar
So nice to see you here at Taki’s place. A movie review? Quite a surprise given the nature of your work I’ve read in the past.
I haven’t seen a movie in years. However I did enjoy “State and Main.” Mamet is arguably one of the few great talents in Hollywood.
Will you be sticking to lighter fare here at Taki’s, or can we expect some meatier topics?
Click to flag this comment as abusive
Thanks for the welcome. Films and politics go together—narratives anc actors. I’ll try to write mostly about movies but I’ll try to do other things. Re Mamet. I also liked “House of Cards” and “The Spanish Prisoner.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
For the record, I would not choose an academic career a second time if I were forty years younger. I discouraged every one of my five children from pursuing such an abhorrent, thankless existence, and I suspect my girlfriend who broke up with me in 1963, when I accepted a fellowship to Yale rather than attending NYU Law School, made a sensible decision. Fortunately for me, the women who married me were less sensible. Like Leon, who is a friend of many years, I have profound contempt for most academics I have encountered, and particularly in the social sciences and humanities.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
Sorry, but for me trading bonds and being a Finance professor at The American University of Paris are the two most fun things you can do with your pants on (and sober). The trick of being an academic nowadays is to be part of the system, but not of the system so it can’t control and absorb you like the BORG. If any film actually tried to capture the pettiness of that the self-referential academic world has become from institutionalized rent-seeking it would rival the tedium of a stock-footage festival under the Soviet Union. Best to shake things up by instructing your students that you unapologetically encourage them to “make a difference” in the world by making as much money as possible.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
Like Leon, who is a friend of many years, I have profound contempt for most academics I have encountered, and particularly in the social sciences and humanities.
God bless you.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
I don’t watch modern movies.
Tonight, I thoroughly enjoyed an encore of “Kiss of Death”, followed by “Dial ‘M’ for Murder”.
Tomorrow, I plan to watch “Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea”, followed by “The Third Man”.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
Oh - and Leon:
I wear a pony tail (not tale) and my politics make Rush Limbaugh look like a communist.
Click to flag this comment as abusive
Thanks again for your comments. I just want to stress that I have a lot of respect to many professors even those with pony tails...Sorry about the “tale.”. I have to remember that we don’t have a full-time copy editor here. And the Third Man is one of my favorites (as are the other three films you mentioned).
Click to flag this comment as abusive
I dropped out of the University of Chicago after one year. It’s one of the better decisions of my life. I wandered around and ultimately got into building. That’s been really good for me. There’s no real security and you have to learn to deal with insecurity and risk. But you know what.... I’m alive!
Click to flag this comment as abusive
Post a Comment
By submitting this form, you give Taki's Magazine permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. Personal attacks, ethnic slurs, the riding of hobby horses and the beating of dead ones will be deleted as soon as they are detected by our small but alert staff. Repeat abusers of this policy will be barred from leaving comments. All comments reflect only the views of those posting them and not necessarily those of this website, its editors, or authors. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.
Commenting is not available in this section entry.