oh Lord, please find me an academia-related blog (and specifically, one aimed at people in the grad admissions process) that is not full of bitter, condescending whiners telling folks in my position why they should never ever choose to be in my position. it's not just the overlooked adjuncts or the people who went without funding and didn't finish and work in a coffee shop -- it's also people who are in lovely tenure-track positions at nice four-year colleges. people like tim burke, for example, whose blog intrigues and frustrates me no end. burke works at swarthmore and still tells people never to go to grad school. huh?

leaving the blogosphere for the real world isn't much better. it's nice feeling elated right now because of the dizzying rocket-launch from my drastically lowered expectations. but did all my advisors really have to tell me that it would be a long shot to get into *any* of my programs? did they stop to consider how important this might be to me? did they consider that they almost caused me NOT to go through with the applications (and thereby, NOT to follow through on a major dream)?

the answer, of course, is that no, they didn't. they could simply have given me the admissions stats and really, actually worked with me on improving my essays and application materials. instead, every single one of them, with one notable exception, basically seemed to be telling me, well, sure, i did fine, but you'll never make it. most of them told me these things for purportedly institutional reasons (too many people, too few spots). but too often, it sounded as if these folks, whether at swat or on the blogs or elsewhere in my life, were trashing me, and academia as an culture, without ever considering their own position in that culture. i hope that, when i get a decent position at an at least moderately well-respected college or university (because i will, damn it!), i will be honest without playing Defending the Keep on my mentees.