.
In a comment in which he comes over as a patronising slimeball, Arthur Houghton (American CPRI President who apparently cannot manage to post his own comments on the Lobboblog) writes nastily of a colleague who was quoted (incompletely) by the Art Newspaper that he should "can it":
Well, I for one think that the teaching duties of all academics, whether in schools or institutions of higher learning, include instilling ethics in their students. I find it a surprising notion that advocacy of protection of a threatened resource is in some way not part of the concerns (indeed duties) of scholarship. Who is it that should advise on national policy, academic teachers or Santa Fe stationery shop proprietors, Chicago sewage farm workers, Penn State football coaches or Detroit bus drivers? That dugup coin dealers and dugup collectors do not want to hear about these issues is not the problem of the academic teacher. Coineys are not academics and do not feel constrained to emulate many of the ethical standards of those who are. They "excuse" themselves by suggesting:
But the same is found over on Moneta-L. There the moderators are closing their eyes to similar childish and ignorant personal attacks by ACCG's John Hooker who says:
Vignette: Sewer logic of the coineys. Photo, Mr Houghton has an MA and an American flag and uses other people's blogs to have a go at Professor Elkins.
In a comment in which he comes over as a patronising slimeball, Arthur Houghton (American CPRI President who apparently cannot manage to post his own comments on the Lobboblog) writes nastily of a colleague who was quoted (incompletely) by the Art Newspaper that he should "can it":"Dr. Elkins should unwind his conflicted views, get on with the business of scholarship and teaching and stop railing at the market that yields up the evidence he so eagerly uses in his own work."
Well, I for one think that the teaching duties of all academics, whether in schools or institutions of higher learning, include instilling ethics in their students. I find it a surprising notion that advocacy of protection of a threatened resource is in some way not part of the concerns (indeed duties) of scholarship. Who is it that should advise on national policy, academic teachers or Santa Fe stationery shop proprietors, Chicago sewage farm workers, Penn State football coaches or Detroit bus drivers? That dugup coin dealers and dugup collectors do not want to hear about these issues is not the problem of the academic teacher. Coineys are not academics and do not feel constrained to emulate many of the ethical standards of those who are. They "excuse" themselves by suggesting:"With the exception of a relative handful of specialist scholars, academics know almost nothing about coins".Most of us know very little at first hand about the hydraulics of sewers and the life cycles of sewer rats, but can smell both a mile off. Feh!
But the same is found over on Moneta-L. There the moderators are closing their eyes to similar childish and ignorant personal attacks by ACCG's John Hooker who says:
It seems that Arthur Houghton* has taken The Art Newspaper, rolled it up, and used it to smack "puppy-mill Ph.D." Nathan Elkins on the muzzle [...] much the same as I did.It seems to me that it is the advocate of violence towards animals, tediously-verbose, name-dropping amateur celtologist (with no PhD, puppy mill or otherwise, so in no real position to judge) who needs a "slap". It is notable that neither Houghton nor Hooker, let alone Lobboblogger Tompa can actually point out where in his several published articles on the topic, Nathan Elkins is wrong. Instead they indulge in typical coiney behaviour, happy-slapping personal attacks and denigration.
Vignette: Sewer logic of the coineys. Photo, Mr Houghton has an MA and an American flag and uses other people's blogs to have a go at Professor Elkins.
2 comments:
As an alumnus of the University of Missouri I am revolted by the suggestion that it is a PhD mill. The Department of Art History and Archaeology is a small department with a vibrant and rich intellectual history. It gives individual attention to its small community of graduate students and requires high quality research from them. The program graduates a Ph.D. maybe once every year or two - hardly a mill.
As you imply though the source of the statement seems pretty dim.
I think the person making that comment has not the faintest idea what he is talking about, just likes the sound of his own voice. I am revolted by the idea of slapping a "puppy" (even a metaphorical one) across the muzzle with a rolled-up copy of Art Newspaper. What are these people (I use the term loosely) thinking of?
Post a Comment