Planning

I return to teaching in January. That gives me 6 months (including what's left of August and the beginning of January before school starts) to write six chapters. Two of them are virtually complete: I just have to add a bit to them. So I have to bring at least one to completion every month.

This calls for a measured approach of neither rushing nor procrastinating. Festina lente. I have to work almost every day I am not on a trip someplace, but I don't have to rush on any particular day. I don't feel the need to use timers right now. I can just start working shortly after I get up and try to devote most of each morning to the writing, until about 10:30 or 11.

I am also re-memorizing Gamoneda's Libro del frío (for the second time). That is the activity that will keep my brain occupied at night. I'm sure an article on Gamoneda will emerge somewhere from there.

One Project Conceals Another

As I was writing a paragraph today, I realized I needed to write a whole 'nother book on the generation of poets that includes Ullán, Gimferrer, Sánchez Robayna... Ah, well. Every book contains a second book struggling to get out, the book behind or beyond the book. One project conceals another. The discipline lies in keeping to one's present project without jumping to something seemingly more appealing. I already have a book after this one on Lorca, so this new project will have to wait in line.

Yes, I know that "nother" is not a real word.

Fuel

What is your fuel? Caffeine? Good food? Fountain pen ink? Perfume? Sex? Music? Massage? Praise from others you admire as scholars? The acceptance of articles? Intellectual dialogue? Reading primary texts or foundational works in your field? What happens when you don't get this fuel regularly?

Blocks of Time

Z suggests we need blocks of time in order to enter into our identities as researchers. In other words, it is difficult to sit down to write if one hasn't been assuming the identity as a researcher and writer in the rest of one's life.

She applies this to women, in the first place, though I don't see why it is not applicable to me as well. Researching and writing academic articles and books is such a strange activity that it is hard to assume that as one's primary identity in ordinary life. Of course, the micro-indignities to which women are subjected remain outside of my experience, so it may be that {some) women experience this with even more intensity.

Still, I, like anyone else, have a difficult time transitioning into work. July and early August was spent moving back to St. Louis for my sabbatical. I was moving out of one apartment and into another, storing things at a friend's house, moving things out of my soon-to-be ex-spouse's house, etc...I decided I wouldn't even try to write during July. Now the huge block of time looming is my sabbatical. Within the huge block, I need to have large blocks each day. When I open up my chapters again I think: "Why am I even doing this?" It seem almost crazy. So before I start today I will finish this blog post.

There. It's done.

get-your-goals-and-projects-out-of-your-head

get-your-goals-and-projects-out-of-your-head

Simple Arguments

An argument can be simple, easy to understand, without being simplifying or simplistic. For example, I want to argue that Valente's move toward mysticism occurs by the early 1970s, rather than mostly in the 1980s, as other critics have suggested, and that this fact has certain consequences for the reinterpretation of Spanish literary history. That the shift in his perspective does not involve writing a new kind of poem, but rather in his decision not to write another type (as often). It's not a particularly profound point, and might even seem obvious once I point it out, but it will have implications for the larger shape of my project.

You don't have to be afraid of pointing out the obvious, or even rehearsing knowledge that might seem basic. A really convincing synthesis of existing knowledge can be useful.

Lazy Arguments

I know a little something about laziness. Here are some habits to avoid:

"X is inseparable from Y..." Ok, but what is the actual connection? What are you really saying about the connection between X and Y? Only that they belong in the same conversation?

"It is no coincidence that X and Y arise at the same time..." Once again, you are arguing that X and Y belong together. You are asserting that their co-incidence (occurring at the same time) is no accident. But, once again, what is actual link? Language poetry and Reaganism both occur in the 1980s. Could it be an accident? Yes, it could. Or LP is a reaction against Reagan, or the two could have a third, shared cause, etc...

"Z is no exception..." You state a general trend, and then introduce your own topic with a phrase like this. No problem, except that you aren't stating a very interesting connection between the general trend and your own topic, are you? (You are also using a cliché.) How about situating your topic in relation to the trend by saying that it is a particularly relevant example because it seems to illustrate the trend but really doesn't? Or call into question the relevance of the trend?

Instead of saying: "Avant-garde movements spread through the entire world. Latin America was no exception." You could say, "When Latin American artists became engaged with the avant-garde, they introduced a fundamental element absent from European movements: ..." You can see how much stronger that is. The reader wants to know what the element is.

So a strong argument argues for a relation between two elements that is not simply inseparability, coincidence (or the lack thereof), or the exemplification of a general trend. Weak arguments tend to point to potentially exciting juxtapositions without really articulating what kind of relation there is.