The only thing worse than having too much to read and write about is looking up one’s topic and seeing virtually no secondary literature.
*sigh*
*sigh*
Powered by ScribeFire.
-
About Ashok
I am a graduate student in political science at the University of Dallas who thinks the media is dumb for the most part, yet am immersed myself. I am looking to break my addiction, and this blog is part of the solution: Why not try to see what the past can tell us about the present, as opposed to seeing what the present has to say about the present only?
Currently residing in Cherry Hill, NJ. Facebook. Contact me.
-
OK, I’m sold. What should I read here?
- Analysis of The Gettysburg Address: Is Democracy Feasible?
- Analysis of Lincoln's "Second Inaugural:" Where do American virtues lie?
- Commentary on the Book of Jonah
- On "Batman Begins"
- From Love to God: On Hopkins' "As Kingfishers Catch Fire"
- On Emily Dickinson's "These are the days when birds come back..."
- The Coming Age: Macbeth and the Birth of the Modern World
- On Polemarchus: Commentary on the Republic of Plato, 331d-336a
- A Reading of Plato's "Crito"
- Towards a Nietzschean Understanding of Politics: Notes on "The Case of Wagner"
-
Archives
-
Meta
No the worst is discovering at the end of your PhD that someone else has done exactly the same thing and published it- and you have to junk it all :)
Seriously I faced that because my PhD is tangential to most research in my area of history- so it runs alongside things rather than actually through the historiography- I found I could twist other works around to create a historiography and thus a context for me to argue against. You’ll be fine- what’s your PhD actually on? I know you’ve mentioned Strauss but what aspect?