I love it.
Best journal article title I've ever seen was 'The Unbearable Whiteness of Skiing' which was a sociological study on race amongst ski resort staff, I think. I didn't actually read it, just saw it on jstor once.
I love it.
Best journal article title I've ever seen was 'The Unbearable Whiteness of Skiing' which was a sociological study on race amongst ski resort staff, I think. I didn't actually read it, just saw it on jstor once.
What's wrong with that formula? It would sure make Lewis' title a lot more intriguing, for one. Otherwise nobody who doesn't already know who Duncan Sandys is will probably look twice at it (which is perhaps what he wants).
Something that is awful though is when writers (it probably happens more with journalistic stuff and pop history books but academics still sometimes do it) use stupid obscure chapter titles that give no indication what each chapter is about.
Agree with that.
On the topic of covers, Lewis, I think you could do a lot worse than just an old black and white photo of Sandys.
The only things that really annoy me are epigraphs. If it's that revealing use it in the text, and if it's irrelevant poetry or a Bible quote just fuck off.
Epigraphs make sense in fiction or poetry, because you're not always going to be able to squeeze a certain quote into the text. I agree with you more in academic contexts.
That's a point. I forgot the acknowledgements/dedications. I covered mine in twenty-six words, and I've seen proper people doing it in half a page. Yet some incontinent sorts feel the need to tell you how the last three years of their life have unfolded and fill it with crappy asides ('and for putting up with my eczema!'). Get lost, love.
Fourth-year students tend to be the most gratuitously overwrought, because it's the biggest thing they've written, by some margin, up to this point.
We get it. You want to thank everyone. It's a fourth-year thesis, not the cure for cancer.
Considering an MBA at my undergrad school; talk me out of it.
Pros: It would be easy to get in, still is quite well-respected (Top 3 in Canada), allows me to enter recruitment next year as a "new grad" after my startup venture (which, apparently, is a big concern - some places only hire people with a degree that has a certain year on it for entry-level positions)
Cons: I know I could crack an Ivy League MBA school, but that requires work experience (which is proving quite difficult currently, given my "not a new grad" status)
Oh, EDIT: Obviously I'd be concentrating in Finance, which is where I'd ultimately like to end up.
You finding something 'quite difficult' must throw you into existential crisis.
If you do choose to use your own image, can you let me hide a Lofty in there?
I hoped you would have seen the Lofty suggestion on the last page.
@Lewis:
If Random is getting a mention for that, I've earned one as well, MATE.
Not really; hiring for this sort of thing is largely standardized, so I see where they're coming from given my lol experiences fucking around with startups.
Just start your own company mate. And then hire me.
I'll just include 'Hi TTH' somewhere and cover everyone.
I found the sickest bathroom on campus!! If any of you guys ever come through i'd be more than happy to take you to this spot, its really nice
I actually haven't yet, but thanks for the idea.
Hey Mok, let me know if you meet someone named Daela at Stanford.
Fb says i have a few mutual friends with her. is she cute? i cant tell because her eyes are obscured in literally every pic. never a good sign
She is cute but also Polynesian so I guess it depends how racist you are.
In other news, I've applied to Columbia University. Hold me lads.
I don't think I have ever done as poorly in a test as I just did on my Optics one. I really can't be arsed with this shit anymore. Two more courses to go still...
Just passed the deadline for applying to a semester abroad (fees paid by the Danish government), my first priority is University of Virginia. Only had four U.S. unis available for my study, applied to three of them. Here's hoping I get in, though I highly doubt it.
Which ones did you apply to?
Why UVA?
The options I had were: UVA, San Francisco State, North Florida and Wisconsin. I researched a bit on the internet and it seemed that the best option academically was UVA, also San Francisco might be too expensive to live in even for a semester.
If I don't get in for America I'm probably going to apply for Erasmus in the UK.
Wouldn't you get housing? Every exchange student I have ever met does. UVA and Wisconsin are good schools.
Depends how much of a priority the academics are. I can tell you that spending a semester in San Francisco, if affordable, would be brilliant and would blow all the other places out of the water. It's the best city in the world.
From the presentation that I was given here at uni, tuition fees are covered, not housing but the Danish government has some extra grants we can apply for if we get accepted.
I didn't mean in terms of social life, no, because I've only ever been there by myself or with my family. The social life within the university would probably be pretty standard, I'd say, except with many more things to do with whoever you make friends with. San Francisco is, block-for-block, one of the most beautiful cities in the world, and it's filled with lovely, at times random-seeming places to explore or just hang out in. Even if you never met anyone you could still have a brilliant time just walking around or taking the bus to different places, if you're independent you'll never run out of things to see or do. I could write an essay about it.
UVA and Wisconsin are both good schools and would give the classic American college experience. Madison is a great college town. The schools are huge though; intro classes could have two hundred people in them.
San Francisco State is good too, but the Bay Area is prohibitively expensive. It may also be more of a commuter school with the majority of students working full time.
I have actually heard very good things about Wisconsin and Madison in particular. I'd choose that over UVA if you don't mind the cold.
What the fuck is this bullshit?Please read the attached chapter from Robert Perks and Alistair Thomson The Oral History Reader
and come prepared either to
(a) talk about why the personal history of a particular family member or friend should be recorded (i.e. in an interview)
or
(b) talk about an eye-witness interview that would enhance (or would have enhanced) a written assignment
(b) sounds like a rephrasing of "provide evidence that primary evidence is better/more meaningful/etc. than secondary evidence"
They want you to talk about how personal histories are worthwhile sources because over time they become 'distorted', which allows you to churn out even more histories of x by accounting for the personal and social forces that have led to that distortion. For example the eye-witness interview would be subject to all sorts of pressures over time, so it would enhance a written assignment because you could discuss how their version of events has come to differ from other versions, why it differs, what effect those differences have had on the person, how the event is remembered, and so on and so on.
I've just applied to an MSc in International Business + a CEMS Master in International Management. Exciting times; it means I may be at the LSE for a semester, or perhaps with @Bernanke in Sweden.
Welcome to our expensive alcohol and beautiful women.
I trust you'll be on your best behaviour when we're out with the AIK lads at Berns.
I've got an interview with Columbia tomorrow. Did you do one with Stanford, Mok?
Is that for early choice or whatever they call it, or the regular application process?
Early decision, yup. If they accept me* I'm going.
*and pay me enough